Time to bet that Le Pen won’t get on the ballot – politicalbetting.com

System

Time to bet that Le Pen won’t get on the ballot – politicalbetting.com

Following on from the previous post and the troubles that Le Pen appears to be having getting onto April’s French Presidential ballot I’ve been betting this morning that the final two will not be Macron + Le Pen.

Read the full story here

tlg86

First. There is something seriously wrong with democracy in France if a candidate on c.15% and second place in the polls can't make the starting line.

Surely a deposit system would make more sense. Say, 1m Euros and then you get back 100k for every 0.5% of the vote you get up to 5% when you get it all back.

Tres

This idea to reintroduce imperial measures is traffic cone hotlines levels of pathetic from the government.

Taz

Tres said:

This idea to reintroduce imperial measures is traffic cone hotlines levels of pathetic from the government.

Why the hell would we do that. It is barking.

GeorgeMikes

tlg86 said:

First. There is something seriously wrong with democracy in France if a candidate on c.15% and second place in the polls can't make the starting line.

Surely a deposit system would make more sense. Say, 1m Euros and then you get back 100k for every 0.5% of the vote you get up to 5% when you get it all back.

I daresay the French might see something seriously wrong with democracy if a candidate needed 1m Euros to get a place on the ballot.

Scott_xP

« We wouldn’t say Macron is a genius, but this lot is so hopeless… » French weekly Marianne on Macron’s rivals for the Presidential elections. #Présidentielles2022 https://twitter.com/AgnesCPoirier/status/1496475705403744256/photo/1

DecrepiterJohnL

Tres said:

This idea to reintroduce imperial measures is traffic cone hotlines levels of pathetic from the government.

Reintroduce imperial measures to what? Speed limit signs still show miles per hour, for instance, but champagne can no longer be bought in pints, as Churchill would have had.

kle4

Applicant said:

noneoftheabove said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

noneoftheabove said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

noneoftheabove said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

noneoftheabove said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

noneoftheabove said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

noneoftheabove said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

IanB2 said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

Scott_xP said:

Liz Truss rejects suggestions from @KayBurley that the Tories should hand back £2m the party has received from Russian donors. The foreign secretary says the donors are British citizens and “not necessarily friends of Vladimir Putin”.
https://twitter.com/KevinASchofield/status/1496382942599340032

More blood and soil racism?

Any British citizens are British donors not Russian donors.

That's possibly simplistic, if by citizen you simply mean passport holder. After all, we've effectively been selling passports to the super-rich under the golden passport scheme.

Some Russian criminal comes along and wants to donate lots of money to the Tories, and is rightly told, no. How does taking the same money from the same person in the same circumstances really suddenly become OK if he buys a British passport at the same time?

No I don't simply mean passport holder. He's lived in the UK for eighteen years. He became a citizen by naturalising 7 years after he moved here.

That makes him a Brit and it's racist to say anything else.

Who is he? Temerko?

UK mainstream politicians should not be accepting sizeable donations from anyone who has close links to Russias security forces, however long they have been in the UK or whatever passport they hold.

If people consider that view racist, I would rather be considered racist than pretend it is okay to be accepting these donations.

I really really doubt the same people claiming it is racist to question Tories receiving funds from ex Putin cronies, would give Corbyn the same leeway. I would be consistent on both.

Indeed I would cap donations at £1k per year per person/business/union, to make the whole issue go away.

What evidence fo you have that Temerko has close links to Russia's security forces? Other than he used to be Russian?

Whether they were born in Moscow or Manchester, anyone whom there is actual evidence or especially a conviction for such absolutely is an issue. Casting aspersions due to race is an entirely different matter.

And considering the courts said that Putin was trying to persecute Temerko back in 2005 I'm assuming the evidence from the courts is the polar opposite of your allegations. Unless you have some overwhelming new evidence?

From reuters below. According to them he himself accepts he has had formal relations with Russian security services. Claims to have fallen out with Putin and that is the most likely explanation by far but if you were FSB wanting an agent active at the top of UK politics, your cover story would indeed be a fall out.

Really no-one should be able to buy access to our political leaders in the way they do, but to allow people with historic links to a hostile superpower to do so, whether they have fallen out or not, is a massive security risk.

https://www.reuters.com/investigates/special-report/britain-eu-johnson-russian/

"Temerko said that in those days his status meant he was essentially untouchable. His security ties, he said, once got him access to a meeting of the Russian Security Council, the circle of 24 top Russian officials, chaired by Putin, who steer national security policy."

"One of Temerko’s former business partners in Russia, Leonid Nevzlin, said Temerko had long-standing ties with Russian security agencies, but declined to say whether he believes those ties remain active. Nevzlin and Temerko were shareholders in oil firm Yukos, before Putin’s government seized control of the company. Nevzlin, who was one of the main shareholders, said Yukos’s management brought Temerko in “for several projects as well as for his contacts at the top of the Federal Security Service and the Defence Ministry."

"Asked to respond, Temerko said in a follow-up interview this week that his role at Yukos encompassed the oil company’s connections with the entire Russian state, not just with the Defence Ministry. His relations with people in the security services, he added, were “formal” and not “personal.” He denied having any ongoing links with Russian security services."

Not to be a Grammar Nazi but there is a crucial difference between "has" and "had". The use of past tense or present tense there is extremely important.

Throughout history many defectors and migrants have left a country and played important roles going forwards in even classified materials. The Manhattan Project in World War Two famously even had German-born scientists working in it like Hans Bethe.

The fact that Temerko had connections with Russia doesn't mean he has them. Yes you can imply that the fall out with Putin's Russia could be a "cover story" but the simple fact is that its more than that - the evidence has been put before the courts already and the courts ruled that he was being persecuted by Putin. Furthermore I expect (but have no evidence, its simply reasonable to assume) that MI6 would put such potentially exposed people on a watchlist and be looking for evidence of any such risks.

I put faith in the security services and the rule of law where the courts have ruled that he is persecuted by Putin. Why do you object to the rule of law?

First I am considered a racist for objecting to ex Putin connections funding the Tory party and having privileged access to our leaders, now I am accused of rejecting the rule of law.

This is simply bonkers.

For a low level MoD or Security Services role we would interview people with great background depth and rule out people for things like an alcoholic mother or a brother with a gambling problem. Yet many seem quite content with billionaires who attended the Russian Security Council meetings chaired by Putin to pay for access to our PMs and Foreign Secretaries.

I question institutions because they repeatedly fail and need scrutiny. I question financial motives because it is an obvious way to control people. This is common sense, not racism or rejecting the rule of law.

Its not bonkers. The security services (presumably) and the courts (definitely) have looked into Temerko. Since decades ago, when Tony Blair was PM. The courts ruled that Termerko was being persecuted by Putin, that is a matter of case history that is public record. That is the rule of law.

Furthermore Termerko acquired British citizenship over a decade ago, seven years after he migrated here when Blair was Prime Minister. So he is British, that is a simple fact, so to call him Russian instead of British is racism that belongs in the BNP. Migrants who acquire British citizenship are Britons they are not the nationality of their birth and that is unequivocal.

Or do you seriously not accept that migrants who have had British citizenship for over a decade are Britons?

He is British. He is an ex Putin connection who many say has current connections to the Russian state. He himself says he has had past connections to the Russian state and security services but does not any more.

It is not being born Russian that should disqualify him from paid access to the PM, it is the connections to the Russian state and its security apparatus.

Past connections, not present ones, which the courts (and presumably our security services) have already ruled upon.

Should that mean he's disbarred for life, when the courts have already ruled on this matter?

Disbarred? From what, buying the influence of a PM? Yes

Living here, running a business, expressing his opinions? No

Nobody is buying influence of a PM. British citizens are entitled to donate to political parties and you've accepted that he is a British citizen.

So under what procedure should you strip his rights away, when he's a British citizen that the courts have already ruled is persecuted by Putin?

From the same Reuters article. This is paying for influence.

"Temerko spoke warmly about his “friend” Johnson, telling how the two men sometimes call each other “Sasha,” the Russian diminutive for Alexander, which is Johnson’s real first name. He described how, at the beginning of Johnson’s tenure as Foreign Secretary from 2016 to 2018, they would often “plot” late into the evening over a bottle of wine on the balcony of Johnson’s office at parliament in Westminster."

As stated my control would be a max £1k political donation per year from any individual, business or union, which would make these issues irrelevant. Until then it should be political parties and leaders exercising responsibility or facing public flak when they dont!

And that's why funding reform will never happen.

Well, one reason.

But I absolutely support very strict limits on amounts that can be given. Since doners aren't supposed to directly gain from doing so the risks of giving them such influence outweighs the 'harm' of a party not being able to receive flipping great wodges of cash from a small group of people and organisations. Spend less and ask for volunteers.

Were Charles here he'd say something about people just wanting to give bsck etc, but tough, and they'd get over the disappointment.

CarlottaVance

FPT:

malcolmg said:

Burgessian said:

Nigel_Foremain said:

Theuniondivvie said:

Lol, Yoons going mental in the replies.

Alex Salmond, your ex-leader. RT apologist for Putin. Nats really should keep quiet on this subject too

The interview given by Alyn Smith MP after the meeting in Kiev was hilarious. They really ought to keep quiet.

He needs to be locked up in a dark room and key thrown away.

Don’t worry - he lives in London and pisses and moans about having to fly up to Scotland for constituency work every week - a friend had the misfortune to sit next to him on the plane once…

tlg86

GeorgeMikes said:

tlg86 said:

First. There is something seriously wrong with democracy in France if a candidate on c.15% and second place in the polls can't make the starting line.

Surely a deposit system would make more sense. Say, 1m Euros and then you get back 100k for every 0.5% of the vote you get up to 5% when you get it all back.

I daresay the French might see something seriously wrong with democracy if a candidate needed 1m Euros to get a place on the ballot.

Well whatever, whatever. The deposit to get on the ballot for Mayor of London is £10,000. Given that 20 candidates made it on to the list - and only three got their £10,000 back - I'd say it's too low.

Ideally you want it to be high enough so that only serious candidates run, but I'd also refund it progressively so as not to put people off just in case they don't make the threshold.

kle4

DecrepiterJohnL said:

Tres said:

This idea to reintroduce imperial measures is traffic cone hotlines levels of pathetic from the government.

Reintroduce imperial measures to what? Speed limit signs still show miles per hour, for instance, but champagne can no longer be bought in pints, as Churchill would have had.

And life has gone on nevertheless. What benefits will occur from this new old path?

TimS

DecrepiterJohnL said:

Tres said:

This idea to reintroduce imperial measures is traffic cone hotlines levels of pathetic from the government.

Reintroduce imperial measures to what? Speed limit signs still show miles per hour, for instance, but champagne can no longer be bought in pints, as Churchill would have had.

It's bonkers. Zero benefit. If they're going to do cones hotline style policies then at least choose ones that will be popular. For example, for all the hilarity at the time I think Shapps's silencing of excessive train announcements is a good idea.

Applicant

kle4 said:

Applicant said:

noneoftheabove said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

noneoftheabove said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

noneoftheabove said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

noneoftheabove said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

noneoftheabove said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

noneoftheabove said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

IanB2 said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

Scott_xP said:

Liz Truss rejects suggestions from @KayBurley that the Tories should hand back £2m the party has received from Russian donors. The foreign secretary says the donors are British citizens and “not necessarily friends of Vladimir Putin”.
https://twitter.com/KevinASchofield/status/1496382942599340032

More blood and soil racism?

Any British citizens are British donors not Russian donors.

That's possibly simplistic, if by citizen you simply mean passport holder. After all, we've effectively been selling passports to the super-rich under the golden passport scheme.

Some Russian criminal comes along and wants to donate lots of money to the Tories, and is rightly told, no. How does taking the same money from the same person in the same circumstances really suddenly become OK if he buys a British passport at the same time?

No I don't simply mean passport holder. He's lived in the UK for eighteen years. He became a citizen by naturalising 7 years after he moved here.

That makes him a Brit and it's racist to say anything else.

Who is he? Temerko?

UK mainstream politicians should not be accepting sizeable donations from anyone who has close links to Russias security forces, however long they have been in the UK or whatever passport they hold.

If people consider that view racist, I would rather be considered racist than pretend it is okay to be accepting these donations.

I really really doubt the same people claiming it is racist to question Tories receiving funds from ex Putin cronies, would give Corbyn the same leeway. I would be consistent on both.

Indeed I would cap donations at £1k per year per person/business/union, to make the whole issue go away.

What evidence fo you have that Temerko has close links to Russia's security forces? Other than he used to be Russian?

Whether they were born in Moscow or Manchester, anyone whom there is actual evidence or especially a conviction for such absolutely is an issue. Casting aspersions due to race is an entirely different matter.

And considering the courts said that Putin was trying to persecute Temerko back in 2005 I'm assuming the evidence from the courts is the polar opposite of your allegations. Unless you have some overwhelming new evidence?

From reuters below. According to them he himself accepts he has had formal relations with Russian security services. Claims to have fallen out with Putin and that is the most likely explanation by far but if you were FSB wanting an agent active at the top of UK politics, your cover story would indeed be a fall out.

Really no-one should be able to buy access to our political leaders in the way they do, but to allow people with historic links to a hostile superpower to do so, whether they have fallen out or not, is a massive security risk.

https://www.reuters.com/investigates/special-report/britain-eu-johnson-russian/

"Temerko said that in those days his status meant he was essentially untouchable. His security ties, he said, once got him access to a meeting of the Russian Security Council, the circle of 24 top Russian officials, chaired by Putin, who steer national security policy."

"One of Temerko’s former business partners in Russia, Leonid Nevzlin, said Temerko had long-standing ties with Russian security agencies, but declined to say whether he believes those ties remain active. Nevzlin and Temerko were shareholders in oil firm Yukos, before Putin’s government seized control of the company. Nevzlin, who was one of the main shareholders, said Yukos’s management brought Temerko in “for several projects as well as for his contacts at the top of the Federal Security Service and the Defence Ministry."

"Asked to respond, Temerko said in a follow-up interview this week that his role at Yukos encompassed the oil company’s connections with the entire Russian state, not just with the Defence Ministry. His relations with people in the security services, he added, were “formal” and not “personal.” He denied having any ongoing links with Russian security services."

Not to be a Grammar Nazi but there is a crucial difference between "has" and "had". The use of past tense or present tense there is extremely important.

Throughout history many defectors and migrants have left a country and played important roles going forwards in even classified materials. The Manhattan Project in World War Two famously even had German-born scientists working in it like Hans Bethe.

The fact that Temerko had connections with Russia doesn't mean he has them. Yes you can imply that the fall out with Putin's Russia could be a "cover story" but the simple fact is that its more than that - the evidence has been put before the courts already and the courts ruled that he was being persecuted by Putin. Furthermore I expect (but have no evidence, its simply reasonable to assume) that MI6 would put such potentially exposed people on a watchlist and be looking for evidence of any such risks.

I put faith in the security services and the rule of law where the courts have ruled that he is persecuted by Putin. Why do you object to the rule of law?

First I am considered a racist for objecting to ex Putin connections funding the Tory party and having privileged access to our leaders, now I am accused of rejecting the rule of law.

This is simply bonkers.

For a low level MoD or Security Services role we would interview people with great background depth and rule out people for things like an alcoholic mother or a brother with a gambling problem. Yet many seem quite content with billionaires who attended the Russian Security Council meetings chaired by Putin to pay for access to our PMs and Foreign Secretaries.

I question institutions because they repeatedly fail and need scrutiny. I question financial motives because it is an obvious way to control people. This is common sense, not racism or rejecting the rule of law.

Its not bonkers. The security services (presumably) and the courts (definitely) have looked into Temerko. Since decades ago, when Tony Blair was PM. The courts ruled that Termerko was being persecuted by Putin, that is a matter of case history that is public record. That is the rule of law.

Furthermore Termerko acquired British citizenship over a decade ago, seven years after he migrated here when Blair was Prime Minister. So he is British, that is a simple fact, so to call him Russian instead of British is racism that belongs in the BNP. Migrants who acquire British citizenship are Britons they are not the nationality of their birth and that is unequivocal.

Or do you seriously not accept that migrants who have had British citizenship for over a decade are Britons?

He is British. He is an ex Putin connection who many say has current connections to the Russian state. He himself says he has had past connections to the Russian state and security services but does not any more.

It is not being born Russian that should disqualify him from paid access to the PM, it is the connections to the Russian state and its security apparatus.

Past connections, not present ones, which the courts (and presumably our security services) have already ruled upon.

Should that mean he's disbarred for life, when the courts have already ruled on this matter?

Disbarred? From what, buying the influence of a PM? Yes

Living here, running a business, expressing his opinions? No

Nobody is buying influence of a PM. British citizens are entitled to donate to political parties and you've accepted that he is a British citizen.

So under what procedure should you strip his rights away, when he's a British citizen that the courts have already ruled is persecuted by Putin?

From the same Reuters article. This is paying for influence.

"Temerko spoke warmly about his “friend” Johnson, telling how the two men sometimes call each other “Sasha,” the Russian diminutive for Alexander, which is Johnson’s real first name. He described how, at the beginning of Johnson’s tenure as Foreign Secretary from 2016 to 2018, they would often “plot” late into the evening over a bottle of wine on the balcony of Johnson’s office at parliament in Westminster."

As stated my control would be a max £1k political donation per year from any individual, business or union, which would make these issues irrelevant. Until then it should be political parties and leaders exercising responsibility or facing public flak when they dont!

And that's why funding reform will never happen.

Well, one reason.

But I absolutely support very strict limits on amounts that can be given. Since doners aren't supposed to directly gain from doing so the risks of giving them such influence outweighs the 'harm' of a party not being able to receive flipping great wodges of cash from a small group of people and organisations. Spend less and ask for volunteers.

Were Charles here he'd say something about people just wanting to give bsck etc, but tough, and they'd get over the disappointment.

The problem is, funding reform will require cross-party agreement to avoid the party in opposition claiming the governing party is rigging the system.

And the Tories will always insist that unions are treated like any other donor, and Labour will always insist that they aren't.

CarlottaVance

Tres said:

This idea to reintroduce imperial measures is traffic cone hotlines levels of pathetic from the government.

Traffic Cones hotline was an important principle - giving voters access to a bureaucracy which before had been untouchable and unaccountable.

This on the other hand, as Malc would say is pure “mince”.

It’s actually a study looking for any benefits of doing it.

I’ll happily do it.

“None”

Invoice attached.

MoonRabbit

On topic. I don’t have a bet here. But I like to think a good nose for outside bets. Here it is sniffing for a good deal

.

Firstly as header shows it’s crowded thistime on the right in first round, so whoever comes second might not have a high %. Secondly I know Socialist parties used to win elections, and are now 1% in polls. So where has it gone. Mostly I suspect to Macron and Melenchon.
So for Melrnchon not to sneak into surprise second it needs those lefty’s to stick with Macron in the first round. And maybe they won’t? Macron is sure to progress, but Melechron can be surprise second.

That’s what my nose suggests.

CarlottaVance

Scott_xP said:

« We wouldn’t say Macron is a genius, but this lot is so hopeless… » French weekly Marianne on Macron’s rivals for the Presidential elections. #Présidentielles2022 https://twitter.com/AgnesCPoirier/status/1496475705403744256/photo/1

I suspect we can (nearly?) all agree Macron is the least worse option…

Morris_Dancer

We should return to proper money.

Farthings, ha'pennies, pennies, bits, groats, shillings, crowns, marks, pounds, and guineas. Huzzah!

DecrepiterJohnL

kle4 said:

DecrepiterJohnL said:

Tres said:

This idea to reintroduce imperial measures is traffic cone hotlines levels of pathetic from the government.

Reintroduce imperial measures to what? Speed limit signs still show miles per hour, for instance, but champagne can no longer be bought in pints, as Churchill would have had.

And life has gone on nevertheless. What benefits will occur from this new old path?

No idea. The devil is in the detail. I suspect teaching schoolchildren to measure their heights in feet and inches, while using metres for physics lessons, would probably be a good idea but I've not seen any detail of what the government intends, if it intends anything at all: some policies are for announcing, not enacting.

Burgessian

This is quite something. Vladimir Putin's public humiliation of his spy chief at the recent conclave. I hadn't realised quite how contemptuous he is of his apparatchiks. Subtitles provided. Really worth watching.

https://twitter.com/peterliakhov/status/1495851796782362628

Fairliered

CarlottaVance said:

FPT:

malcolmg said:

Burgessian said:

Nigel_Foremain said:

Theuniondivvie said:

Lol, Yoons going mental in the replies.

Alex Salmond, your ex-leader. RT apologist for Putin. Nats really should keep quiet on this subject too

The interview given by Alyn Smith MP after the meeting in Kiev was hilarious. They really ought to keep quiet.

He needs to be locked up in a dark room and key thrown away.

Don’t worry - he lives in London and pisses and moans about having to fly up to Scotland for constituency work every week - a friend had the misfortune to sit next to him on the plane once…

I would keep the key and throw creepy Alyn Smith away.

CarlottaVance

PM confirms our revelations this morning.

"In light of increasingly threatening behaviour from Russia, and in line with previous support, UK will shortly be providing further package of military support to Ukraine. This will include lethal aid in the form of defensive weapons.."

https://twitter.com/MrHarryCole/status/1496478864708710401

WhisperingOracle

Burgessian said:

This is quite something. Vladimir Putin's public humiliation of his spy chief at the recent conclave. I hadn't realised quite how contemptuous he is of his apparatchiks. Subtitles provided. Really worth watching.

https://twitter.com/peterliakhov/status/1495851796782362628

I was fascinated by this too. It reminds me very much of the public humiliations of Stalin's show-trials, in tone.

It also very obviously shows that Putin feels he has to reinforce his position through some level of fear, both to the public at large and internally, at the moment. There must be internal issues, probably several.

Malmesbury

Applicant said:

kle4 said:

Applicant said:

noneoftheabove said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

noneoftheabove said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

noneoftheabove said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

noneoftheabove said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

noneoftheabove said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

noneoftheabove said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

IanB2 said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

Scott_xP said:

Liz Truss rejects suggestions from @KayBurley that the Tories should hand back £2m the party has received from Russian donors. The foreign secretary says the donors are British citizens and “not necessarily friends of Vladimir Putin”.
https://twitter.com/KevinASchofield/status/1496382942599340032

More blood and soil racism?

Any British citizens are British donors not Russian donors.

That's possibly simplistic, if by citizen you simply mean passport holder. After all, we've effectively been selling passports to the super-rich under the golden passport scheme.

Some Russian criminal comes along and wants to donate lots of money to the Tories, and is rightly told, no. How does taking the same money from the same person in the same circumstances really suddenly become OK if he buys a British passport at the same time?

No I don't simply mean passport holder. He's lived in the UK for eighteen years. He became a citizen by naturalising 7 years after he moved here.

That makes him a Brit and it's racist to say anything else.

Who is he? Temerko?

UK mainstream politicians should not be accepting sizeable donations from anyone who has close links to Russias security forces, however long they have been in the UK or whatever passport they hold.

If people consider that view racist, I would rather be considered racist than pretend it is okay to be accepting these donations.

I really really doubt the same people claiming it is racist to question Tories receiving funds from ex Putin cronies, would give Corbyn the same leeway. I would be consistent on both.

Indeed I would cap donations at £1k per year per person/business/union, to make the whole issue go away.

What evidence fo you have that Temerko has close links to Russia's security forces? Other than he used to be Russian?

Whether they were born in Moscow or Manchester, anyone whom there is actual evidence or especially a conviction for such absolutely is an issue. Casting aspersions due to race is an entirely different matter.

And considering the courts said that Putin was trying to persecute Temerko back in 2005 I'm assuming the evidence from the courts is the polar opposite of your allegations. Unless you have some overwhelming new evidence?

From reuters below. According to them he himself accepts he has had formal relations with Russian security services. Claims to have fallen out with Putin and that is the most likely explanation by far but if you were FSB wanting an agent active at the top of UK politics, your cover story would indeed be a fall out.

Really no-one should be able to buy access to our political leaders in the way they do, but to allow people with historic links to a hostile superpower to do so, whether they have fallen out or not, is a massive security risk.

https://www.reuters.com/investigates/special-report/britain-eu-johnson-russian/

"Temerko said that in those days his status meant he was essentially untouchable. His security ties, he said, once got him access to a meeting of the Russian Security Council, the circle of 24 top Russian officials, chaired by Putin, who steer national security policy."

"One of Temerko’s former business partners in Russia, Leonid Nevzlin, said Temerko had long-standing ties with Russian security agencies, but declined to say whether he believes those ties remain active. Nevzlin and Temerko were shareholders in oil firm Yukos, before Putin’s government seized control of the company. Nevzlin, who was one of the main shareholders, said Yukos’s management brought Temerko in “for several projects as well as for his contacts at the top of the Federal Security Service and the Defence Ministry."

"Asked to respond, Temerko said in a follow-up interview this week that his role at Yukos encompassed the oil company’s connections with the entire Russian state, not just with the Defence Ministry. His relations with people in the security services, he added, were “formal” and not “personal.” He denied having any ongoing links with Russian security services."

Not to be a Grammar Nazi but there is a crucial difference between "has" and "had". The use of past tense or present tense there is extremely important.

Throughout history many defectors and migrants have left a country and played important roles going forwards in even classified materials. The Manhattan Project in World War Two famously even had German-born scientists working in it like Hans Bethe.

The fact that Temerko had connections with Russia doesn't mean he has them. Yes you can imply that the fall out with Putin's Russia could be a "cover story" but the simple fact is that its more than that - the evidence has been put before the courts already and the courts ruled that he was being persecuted by Putin. Furthermore I expect (but have no evidence, its simply reasonable to assume) that MI6 would put such potentially exposed people on a watchlist and be looking for evidence of any such risks.

I put faith in the security services and the rule of law where the courts have ruled that he is persecuted by Putin. Why do you object to the rule of law?

First I am considered a racist for objecting to ex Putin connections funding the Tory party and having privileged access to our leaders, now I am accused of rejecting the rule of law.

This is simply bonkers.

For a low level MoD or Security Services role we would interview people with great background depth and rule out people for things like an alcoholic mother or a brother with a gambling problem. Yet many seem quite content with billionaires who attended the Russian Security Council meetings chaired by Putin to pay for access to our PMs and Foreign Secretaries.

I question institutions because they repeatedly fail and need scrutiny. I question financial motives because it is an obvious way to control people. This is common sense, not racism or rejecting the rule of law.

Its not bonkers. The security services (presumably) and the courts (definitely) have looked into Temerko. Since decades ago, when Tony Blair was PM. The courts ruled that Termerko was being persecuted by Putin, that is a matter of case history that is public record. That is the rule of law.

Furthermore Termerko acquired British citizenship over a decade ago, seven years after he migrated here when Blair was Prime Minister. So he is British, that is a simple fact, so to call him Russian instead of British is racism that belongs in the BNP. Migrants who acquire British citizenship are Britons they are not the nationality of their birth and that is unequivocal.

Or do you seriously not accept that migrants who have had British citizenship for over a decade are Britons?

He is British. He is an ex Putin connection who many say has current connections to the Russian state. He himself says he has had past connections to the Russian state and security services but does not any more.

It is not being born Russian that should disqualify him from paid access to the PM, it is the connections to the Russian state and its security apparatus.

Past connections, not present ones, which the courts (and presumably our security services) have already ruled upon.

Should that mean he's disbarred for life, when the courts have already ruled on this matter?

Disbarred? From what, buying the influence of a PM? Yes

Living here, running a business, expressing his opinions? No

Nobody is buying influence of a PM. British citizens are entitled to donate to political parties and you've accepted that he is a British citizen.

So under what procedure should you strip his rights away, when he's a British citizen that the courts have already ruled is persecuted by Putin?

From the same Reuters article. This is paying for influence.

"Temerko spoke warmly about his “friend” Johnson, telling how the two men sometimes call each other “Sasha,” the Russian diminutive for Alexander, which is Johnson’s real first name. He described how, at the beginning of Johnson’s tenure as Foreign Secretary from 2016 to 2018, they would often “plot” late into the evening over a bottle of wine on the balcony of Johnson’s office at parliament in Westminster."

As stated my control would be a max £1k political donation per year from any individual, business or union, which would make these issues irrelevant. Until then it should be political parties and leaders exercising responsibility or facing public flak when they dont!

And that's why funding reform will never happen.

Well, one reason.

But I absolutely support very strict limits on amounts that can be given. Since doners aren't supposed to directly gain from doing so the risks of giving them such influence outweighs the 'harm' of a party not being able to receive flipping great wodges of cash from a small group of people and organisations. Spend less and ask for volunteers.

Were Charles here he'd say something about people just wanting to give bsck etc, but tough, and they'd get over the disappointment.

The problem is, funding reform will require cross-party agreement to avoid the party in opposition claiming the governing party is rigging the system.

And the Tories will always insist that unions are treated like any other donor, and Labour will always insist that they aren't.

Indeed. I recall a hilarious conversation with a very Old Labour friend

Him - "Trade Union funding is different"
Me - "I will start the National Union of Boilermaker And Hedge Fund Owners"
Him - "That wouldn't be a proper Union"
Me -"Who decides what a proper Union is?"
Him "TUC"
Me - "Non-trivial number of unions are not affiliated to the TUC"
Him - "... government..."
Me - "Excellent. Then the government declares the RMT not to be a union..."
Him - "!!!????!!"

Fairliered

Morris_Dancer said:

We should return to proper money.

Farthings, ha'pennies, pennies, bits, groats, shillings, crowns, marks, pounds, and guineas. Huzzah!

And white fivers.

CarlottaVance

I am shocked that Stephen House, who resigned amid calls for him to quit as Chief Constable of Police Scotland after a series of high profile controversies, would take issue with the resignation of Cressida Dick, who was forced out after a series of high profile controversies.

https://twitter.com/conor_matchett/status/1496434666127167491

noneoftheabove

GeorgeMikes said:

tlg86 said:

First. There is something seriously wrong with democracy in France if a candidate on c.15% and second place in the polls can't make the starting line.

Surely a deposit system would make more sense. Say, 1m Euros and then you get back 100k for every 0.5% of the vote you get up to 5% when you get it all back.

I daresay the French might see something seriously wrong with democracy if a candidate needed 1m Euros to get a place on the ballot.

Sure they can find a friendly billionaire willing to pay.....

Malmesbury

Burgessian said:

This is quite something. Vladimir Putin's public humiliation of his spy chief at the recent conclave. I hadn't realised quite how contemptuous he is of his apparatchiks. Subtitles provided. Really worth watching.

https://twitter.com/peterliakhov/status/1495851796782362628

The whole thing is reaching SPECTRE levels of WTF....

Burgessian

CarlottaVance said:

FPT:

malcolmg said:

Burgessian said:

Nigel_Foremain said:

Theuniondivvie said:

Lol, Yoons going mental in the replies.

Alex Salmond, your ex-leader. RT apologist for Putin. Nats really should keep quiet on this subject too

The interview given by Alyn Smith MP after the meeting in Kiev was hilarious. They really ought to keep quiet.

He needs to be locked up in a dark room and key thrown away.

Don’t worry - he lives in London and pisses and moans about having to fly up to Scotland for constituency work every week - a friend had the misfortune to sit next to him on the plane once…

He used to be an MEP, of course. So just transferred the entitled piss-taking attitude from Strasbourg to Westminster. They have a lovely time the Westminster SNP group. No wonder they're not really serious about independence. They won't all get to be ambassadors.

noneoftheabove

Malmesbury said:

Applicant said:

kle4 said:

Applicant said:

noneoftheabove said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

noneoftheabove said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

noneoftheabove said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

noneoftheabove said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

noneoftheabove said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

noneoftheabove said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

IanB2 said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

Scott_xP said:

Liz Truss rejects suggestions from @KayBurley that the Tories should hand back £2m the party has received from Russian donors. The foreign secretary says the donors are British citizens and “not necessarily friends of Vladimir Putin”.
https://twitter.com/KevinASchofield/status/1496382942599340032

More blood and soil racism?

Any British citizens are British donors not Russian donors.

That's possibly simplistic, if by citizen you simply mean passport holder. After all, we've effectively been selling passports to the super-rich under the golden passport scheme.

Some Russian criminal comes along and wants to donate lots of money to the Tories, and is rightly told, no. How does taking the same money from the same person in the same circumstances really suddenly become OK if he buys a British passport at the same time?

No I don't simply mean passport holder. He's lived in the UK for eighteen years. He became a citizen by naturalising 7 years after he moved here.

That makes him a Brit and it's racist to say anything else.

Who is he? Temerko?

UK mainstream politicians should not be accepting sizeable donations from anyone who has close links to Russias security forces, however long they have been in the UK or whatever passport they hold.

If people consider that view racist, I would rather be considered racist than pretend it is okay to be accepting these donations.

I really really doubt the same people claiming it is racist to question Tories receiving funds from ex Putin cronies, would give Corbyn the same leeway. I would be consistent on both.

Indeed I would cap donations at £1k per year per person/business/union, to make the whole issue go away.

What evidence fo you have that Temerko has close links to Russia's security forces? Other than he used to be Russian?

Whether they were born in Moscow or Manchester, anyone whom there is actual evidence or especially a conviction for such absolutely is an issue. Casting aspersions due to race is an entirely different matter.

And considering the courts said that Putin was trying to persecute Temerko back in 2005 I'm assuming the evidence from the courts is the polar opposite of your allegations. Unless you have some overwhelming new evidence?

From reuters below. According to them he himself accepts he has had formal relations with Russian security services. Claims to have fallen out with Putin and that is the most likely explanation by far but if you were FSB wanting an agent active at the top of UK politics, your cover story would indeed be a fall out.

Really no-one should be able to buy access to our political leaders in the way they do, but to allow people with historic links to a hostile superpower to do so, whether they have fallen out or not, is a massive security risk.

https://www.reuters.com/investigates/special-report/britain-eu-johnson-russian/

"Temerko said that in those days his status meant he was essentially untouchable. His security ties, he said, once got him access to a meeting of the Russian Security Council, the circle of 24 top Russian officials, chaired by Putin, who steer national security policy."

"One of Temerko’s former business partners in Russia, Leonid Nevzlin, said Temerko had long-standing ties with Russian security agencies, but declined to say whether he believes those ties remain active. Nevzlin and Temerko were shareholders in oil firm Yukos, before Putin’s government seized control of the company. Nevzlin, who was one of the main shareholders, said Yukos’s management brought Temerko in “for several projects as well as for his contacts at the top of the Federal Security Service and the Defence Ministry."

"Asked to respond, Temerko said in a follow-up interview this week that his role at Yukos encompassed the oil company’s connections with the entire Russian state, not just with the Defence Ministry. His relations with people in the security services, he added, were “formal” and not “personal.” He denied having any ongoing links with Russian security services."

Not to be a Grammar Nazi but there is a crucial difference between "has" and "had". The use of past tense or present tense there is extremely important.

Throughout history many defectors and migrants have left a country and played important roles going forwards in even classified materials. The Manhattan Project in World War Two famously even had German-born scientists working in it like Hans Bethe.

The fact that Temerko had connections with Russia doesn't mean he has them. Yes you can imply that the fall out with Putin's Russia could be a "cover story" but the simple fact is that its more than that - the evidence has been put before the courts already and the courts ruled that he was being persecuted by Putin. Furthermore I expect (but have no evidence, its simply reasonable to assume) that MI6 would put such potentially exposed people on a watchlist and be looking for evidence of any such risks.

I put faith in the security services and the rule of law where the courts have ruled that he is persecuted by Putin. Why do you object to the rule of law?

First I am considered a racist for objecting to ex Putin connections funding the Tory party and having privileged access to our leaders, now I am accused of rejecting the rule of law.

This is simply bonkers.

For a low level MoD or Security Services role we would interview people with great background depth and rule out people for things like an alcoholic mother or a brother with a gambling problem. Yet many seem quite content with billionaires who attended the Russian Security Council meetings chaired by Putin to pay for access to our PMs and Foreign Secretaries.

I question institutions because they repeatedly fail and need scrutiny. I question financial motives because it is an obvious way to control people. This is common sense, not racism or rejecting the rule of law.

Its not bonkers. The security services (presumably) and the courts (definitely) have looked into Temerko. Since decades ago, when Tony Blair was PM. The courts ruled that Termerko was being persecuted by Putin, that is a matter of case history that is public record. That is the rule of law.

Furthermore Termerko acquired British citizenship over a decade ago, seven years after he migrated here when Blair was Prime Minister. So he is British, that is a simple fact, so to call him Russian instead of British is racism that belongs in the BNP. Migrants who acquire British citizenship are Britons they are not the nationality of their birth and that is unequivocal.

Or do you seriously not accept that migrants who have had British citizenship for over a decade are Britons?

He is British. He is an ex Putin connection who many say has current connections to the Russian state. He himself says he has had past connections to the Russian state and security services but does not any more.

It is not being born Russian that should disqualify him from paid access to the PM, it is the connections to the Russian state and its security apparatus.

Past connections, not present ones, which the courts (and presumably our security services) have already ruled upon.

Should that mean he's disbarred for life, when the courts have already ruled on this matter?

Disbarred? From what, buying the influence of a PM? Yes

Living here, running a business, expressing his opinions? No

Nobody is buying influence of a PM. British citizens are entitled to donate to political parties and you've accepted that he is a British citizen.

So under what procedure should you strip his rights away, when he's a British citizen that the courts have already ruled is persecuted by Putin?

From the same Reuters article. This is paying for influence.

"Temerko spoke warmly about his “friend” Johnson, telling how the two men sometimes call each other “Sasha,” the Russian diminutive for Alexander, which is Johnson’s real first name. He described how, at the beginning of Johnson’s tenure as Foreign Secretary from 2016 to 2018, they would often “plot” late into the evening over a bottle of wine on the balcony of Johnson’s office at parliament in Westminster."

As stated my control would be a max £1k political donation per year from any individual, business or union, which would make these issues irrelevant. Until then it should be political parties and leaders exercising responsibility or facing public flak when they dont!

And that's why funding reform will never happen.

Well, one reason.

But I absolutely support very strict limits on amounts that can be given. Since doners aren't supposed to directly gain from doing so the risks of giving them such influence outweighs the 'harm' of a party not being able to receive flipping great wodges of cash from a small group of people and organisations. Spend less and ask for volunteers.

Were Charles here he'd say something about people just wanting to give bsck etc, but tough, and they'd get over the disappointment.

The problem is, funding reform will require cross-party agreement to avoid the party in opposition claiming the governing party is rigging the system.

And the Tories will always insist that unions are treated like any other donor, and Labour will always insist that they aren't.

Indeed. I recall a hilarious conversation with a very Old Labour friend

Him - "Trade Union funding is different"
Me - "I will start the National Union of Boilermaker And Hedge Fund Owners"
Him - "That wouldn't be a proper Union"
Me -"Who decides what a proper Union is?"
Him "TUC"
Me - "Non-trivial number of unions are not affiliated to the TUC"
Him - "... government..."
Me - "Excellent. Then the government declares the RMT not to be a union..."
Him - "!!!????!!"

There is no good reason for unions to be treated differently beyond that it is the status quo for much Labour funding.

The furthest I would go is allowing unions to organise opt in donations which individuals could choose to use (but that would count against the individuals maximum contribution). The same could apply for businesses to organise opt in donations from shareholders or employees.

DecrepiterJohnL

Fairliered said:

Morris_Dancer said:

We should return to proper money.

Farthings, ha'pennies, pennies, bits, groats, shillings, crowns, marks, pounds, and guineas. Huzzah!

And white fivers.

The owl and pussycat went to sea makes more sense when you look at the old white fivers.

We had blue and pink oncers during the war, to guard against Nazi counterfeiters.

TimS

Malmesbury said:

Burgessian said:

This is quite something. Vladimir Putin's public humiliation of his spy chief at the recent conclave. I hadn't realised quite how contemptuous he is of his apparatchiks. Subtitles provided. Really worth watching.

https://twitter.com/peterliakhov/status/1495851796782362628

The whole thing is reaching SPECTRE levels of WTF....

He really is a Bond Villain isn't he? Even the name: Vladimir Putin.

"Well hello, Mr Macron. I've been expecting you".

MoonRabbit

For those reading my posts yesterday I said I would chat to my friend who is a green member and lives in Bristol where she went to Uni. To ask her what she made of Lucas comments yesterday.

She wasn’t at all aware of what Lucas was arguing. And not clued up on Russian oligarch money going in Tory Party policy.

“Like they who pay the piper play the tune, Lucas was saying Snookie.”
“Like the Pied Piper.”
“…yeah like that.”
“No. Didn’t see that?”
“It’s on her Twitter.”
“I’ll have a look later.”

So I havn’t much to report back on that.

*betting post! She did say though, Greens nearly won a rock solid Labour council seat, and are on course for winning everything, all council seats, the mayor and all the MPs at the election. Is it possible something bonkers that completely bucks the national trend could happen without us realising in a odd port urban enclave with two university populations?

malcolmg

CarlottaVance said:

FPT:

malcolmg said:

Burgessian said:

Nigel_Foremain said:

Theuniondivvie said:

Lol, Yoons going mental in the replies.

Alex Salmond, your ex-leader. RT apologist for Putin. Nats really should keep quiet on this subject too

The interview given by Alyn Smith MP after the meeting in Kiev was hilarious. They really ought to keep quiet.

He needs to be locked up in a dark room and key thrown away.

Don’t worry - he lives in London and pisses and moans about having to fly up to Scotland for constituency work every week - a friend had the misfortune to sit next to him on the plane once…

Doubt he sees his constituency , he will be too busy with other things.

Malmesbury

noneoftheabove said:

Malmesbury said:

Applicant said:

kle4 said:

Applicant said:

noneoftheabove said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

noneoftheabove said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

noneoftheabove said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

noneoftheabove said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

noneoftheabove said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

noneoftheabove said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

IanB2 said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

Scott_xP said:

Liz Truss rejects suggestions from @KayBurley that the Tories should hand back £2m the party has received from Russian donors. The foreign secretary says the donors are British citizens and “not necessarily friends of Vladimir Putin”.
https://twitter.com/KevinASchofield/status/1496382942599340032

More blood and soil racism?

Any British citizens are British donors not Russian donors.

That's possibly simplistic, if by citizen you simply mean passport holder. After all, we've effectively been selling passports to the super-rich under the golden passport scheme.

Some Russian criminal comes along and wants to donate lots of money to the Tories, and is rightly told, no. How does taking the same money from the same person in the same circumstances really suddenly become OK if he buys a British passport at the same time?

No I don't simply mean passport holder. He's lived in the UK for eighteen years. He became a citizen by naturalising 7 years after he moved here.

That makes him a Brit and it's racist to say anything else.

Who is he? Temerko?

UK mainstream politicians should not be accepting sizeable donations from anyone who has close links to Russias security forces, however long they have been in the UK or whatever passport they hold.

If people consider that view racist, I would rather be considered racist than pretend it is okay to be accepting these donations.

I really really doubt the same people claiming it is racist to question Tories receiving funds from ex Putin cronies, would give Corbyn the same leeway. I would be consistent on both.

Indeed I would cap donations at £1k per year per person/business/union, to make the whole issue go away.

What evidence fo you have that Temerko has close links to Russia's security forces? Other than he used to be Russian?

Whether they were born in Moscow or Manchester, anyone whom there is actual evidence or especially a conviction for such absolutely is an issue. Casting aspersions due to race is an entirely different matter.

And considering the courts said that Putin was trying to persecute Temerko back in 2005 I'm assuming the evidence from the courts is the polar opposite of your allegations. Unless you have some overwhelming new evidence?

From reuters below. According to them he himself accepts he has had formal relations with Russian security services. Claims to have fallen out with Putin and that is the most likely explanation by far but if you were FSB wanting an agent active at the top of UK politics, your cover story would indeed be a fall out.

Really no-one should be able to buy access to our political leaders in the way they do, but to allow people with historic links to a hostile superpower to do so, whether they have fallen out or not, is a massive security risk.

https://www.reuters.com/investigates/special-report/britain-eu-johnson-russian/

"Temerko said that in those days his status meant he was essentially untouchable. His security ties, he said, once got him access to a meeting of the Russian Security Council, the circle of 24 top Russian officials, chaired by Putin, who steer national security policy."

"One of Temerko’s former business partners in Russia, Leonid Nevzlin, said Temerko had long-standing ties with Russian security agencies, but declined to say whether he believes those ties remain active. Nevzlin and Temerko were shareholders in oil firm Yukos, before Putin’s government seized control of the company. Nevzlin, who was one of the main shareholders, said Yukos’s management brought Temerko in “for several projects as well as for his contacts at the top of the Federal Security Service and the Defence Ministry."

"Asked to respond, Temerko said in a follow-up interview this week that his role at Yukos encompassed the oil company’s connections with the entire Russian state, not just with the Defence Ministry. His relations with people in the security services, he added, were “formal” and not “personal.” He denied having any ongoing links with Russian security services."

Not to be a Grammar Nazi but there is a crucial difference between "has" and "had". The use of past tense or present tense there is extremely important.

Throughout history many defectors and migrants have left a country and played important roles going forwards in even classified materials. The Manhattan Project in World War Two famously even had German-born scientists working in it like Hans Bethe.

The fact that Temerko had connections with Russia doesn't mean he has them. Yes you can imply that the fall out with Putin's Russia could be a "cover story" but the simple fact is that its more than that - the evidence has been put before the courts already and the courts ruled that he was being persecuted by Putin. Furthermore I expect (but have no evidence, its simply reasonable to assume) that MI6 would put such potentially exposed people on a watchlist and be looking for evidence of any such risks.

I put faith in the security services and the rule of law where the courts have ruled that he is persecuted by Putin. Why do you object to the rule of law?

First I am considered a racist for objecting to ex Putin connections funding the Tory party and having privileged access to our leaders, now I am accused of rejecting the rule of law.

This is simply bonkers.

For a low level MoD or Security Services role we would interview people with great background depth and rule out people for things like an alcoholic mother or a brother with a gambling problem. Yet many seem quite content with billionaires who attended the Russian Security Council meetings chaired by Putin to pay for access to our PMs and Foreign Secretaries.

I question institutions because they repeatedly fail and need scrutiny. I question financial motives because it is an obvious way to control people. This is common sense, not racism or rejecting the rule of law.

Its not bonkers. The security services (presumably) and the courts (definitely) have looked into Temerko. Since decades ago, when Tony Blair was PM. The courts ruled that Termerko was being persecuted by Putin, that is a matter of case history that is public record. That is the rule of law.

Furthermore Termerko acquired British citizenship over a decade ago, seven years after he migrated here when Blair was Prime Minister. So he is British, that is a simple fact, so to call him Russian instead of British is racism that belongs in the BNP. Migrants who acquire British citizenship are Britons they are not the nationality of their birth and that is unequivocal.

Or do you seriously not accept that migrants who have had British citizenship for over a decade are Britons?

He is British. He is an ex Putin connection who many say has current connections to the Russian state. He himself says he has had past connections to the Russian state and security services but does not any more.

It is not being born Russian that should disqualify him from paid access to the PM, it is the connections to the Russian state and its security apparatus.

Past connections, not present ones, which the courts (and presumably our security services) have already ruled upon.

Should that mean he's disbarred for life, when the courts have already ruled on this matter?

Disbarred? From what, buying the influence of a PM? Yes

Living here, running a business, expressing his opinions? No

Nobody is buying influence of a PM. British citizens are entitled to donate to political parties and you've accepted that he is a British citizen.

So under what procedure should you strip his rights away, when he's a British citizen that the courts have already ruled is persecuted by Putin?

From the same Reuters article. This is paying for influence.

"Temerko spoke warmly about his “friend” Johnson, telling how the two men sometimes call each other “Sasha,” the Russian diminutive for Alexander, which is Johnson’s real first name. He described how, at the beginning of Johnson’s tenure as Foreign Secretary from 2016 to 2018, they would often “plot” late into the evening over a bottle of wine on the balcony of Johnson’s office at parliament in Westminster."

As stated my control would be a max £1k political donation per year from any individual, business or union, which would make these issues irrelevant. Until then it should be political parties and leaders exercising responsibility or facing public flak when they dont!

And that's why funding reform will never happen.

Well, one reason.

But I absolutely support very strict limits on amounts that can be given. Since doners aren't supposed to directly gain from doing so the risks of giving them such influence outweighs the 'harm' of a party not being able to receive flipping great wodges of cash from a small group of people and organisations. Spend less and ask for volunteers.

Were Charles here he'd say something about people just wanting to give bsck etc, but tough, and they'd get over the disappointment.

The problem is, funding reform will require cross-party agreement to avoid the party in opposition claiming the governing party is rigging the system.

And the Tories will always insist that unions are treated like any other donor, and Labour will always insist that they aren't.

Indeed. I recall a hilarious conversation with a very Old Labour friend

Him - "Trade Union funding is different"
Me - "I will start the National Union of Boilermaker And Hedge Fund Owners"
Him - "That wouldn't be a proper Union"
Me -"Who decides what a proper Union is?"
Him "TUC"
Me - "Non-trivial number of unions are not affiliated to the TUC"
Him - "... government..."
Me - "Excellent. Then the government declares the RMT not to be a union..."
Him - "!!!????!!"

There is no good reason for unions to be treated differently beyond that is the status quo.

The furthest I would go is allowing unions to organise opt in donations which individuals could choose to use (but that would count against the individuals maximum contribution). The same could apply for businesses to organise opt in donations from shareholders or employees.

That just introduces bundling into UK politics. I think we need to stop introducing bad ideas from America.

malcolmg

Burgessian said:

CarlottaVance said:

FPT:

malcolmg said:

Burgessian said:

Nigel_Foremain said:

Theuniondivvie said:

Lol, Yoons going mental in the replies.

Alex Salmond, your ex-leader. RT apologist for Putin. Nats really should keep quiet on this subject too

The interview given by Alyn Smith MP after the meeting in Kiev was hilarious. They really ought to keep quiet.

He needs to be locked up in a dark room and key thrown away.

Don’t worry - he lives in London and pisses and moans about having to fly up to Scotland for constituency work every week - a friend had the misfortune to sit next to him on the plane once…

He used to be an MEP, of course. So just transferred the entitled piss-taking attitude from Strasbourg to Westminster. They have a lovely time the Westminster SNP group. No wonder they're not really serious about independence. They won't all get to be ambassadors.

Bunch of slimeball troughers.

Cookie

CarlottaVance said:

Tres said:

This idea to reintroduce imperial measures is traffic cone hotlines levels of pathetic from the government.

Traffic Cones hotline was an important principle - giving voters access to a bureaucracy which before had been untouchable and unaccountable.

This on the other hand, as Malc would say is pure “mince”.

It’s actually a study looking for any benefits of doing it.

I’ll happily do it.

“None”

Invoice attached.

We have, at present, an uneasy balance between the units which people use and which are pleasant to say, and the units which are technically easy to calculate in. I'd say the balance is fine. I was uncomfortable with efforts to criminalise the use of imperial measures, but I see no need at all to actively go out of our way to bring imperial measures back into use where we're currently not using them.

Malmesbury

TimS said:

Malmesbury said:

Burgessian said:

This is quite something. Vladimir Putin's public humiliation of his spy chief at the recent conclave. I hadn't realised quite how contemptuous he is of his apparatchiks. Subtitles provided. Really worth watching.

https://twitter.com/peterliakhov/status/1495851796782362628

The whole thing is reaching SPECTRE levels of WTF....

He really is a Bond Villain isn't he? Even the name: Vladimir Putin.

"Well hello, Mr Macron. I've been expecting you".

Well, he gets his ideas on tables for meetings from that nice Mr Stromberg...



"Mmm, maybe I misjudged Stromberg. Any man who drinks Dom Perignon '52 can't be all bad."

CarlottaVance

It should be noted that if RT is shut down in the UK then it's pretty much a certainty the BBC will be kicked out of Russia. Seeing barely anyone watches RT in the UK and they'd still produce their web content I'd rather keep them and still have the BBC operating inside Russia.

https://twitter.com/EliotHiggins/status/1496464538404851719

NickyBreakspear

CarlottaVance said:

Tres said:

This idea to reintroduce imperial measures is traffic cone hotlines levels of pathetic from the government.

Traffic Cones hotline was an important principle - giving voters access to a bureaucracy which before had been untouchable and unaccountable.

This on the other hand, as Malc would say is pure “mince”.

It’s actually a study looking for any benefits of doing it.

I’ll happily do it.

“None”

Invoice attached.

Can I suggest selling petrol and diesel in gallons. We still think about fuel efficiency in miles per gallon - the obvious mixed measure miles per litre does not appear to be well used.

Nigelb

kle4 said:

Applicant said:

noneoftheabove said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

noneoftheabove said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

noneoftheabove said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

noneoftheabove said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

noneoftheabove said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

noneoftheabove said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

IanB2 said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

Scott_xP said:

Liz Truss rejects suggestions from @KayBurley that the Tories should hand back £2m the party has received from Russian donors. The foreign secretary says the donors are British citizens and “not necessarily friends of Vladimir Putin”.
https://twitter.com/KevinASchofield/status/1496382942599340032

More blood and soil racism?

Any British citizens are British donors not Russian donors.

That's possibly simplistic, if by citizen you simply mean passport holder. After all, we've effectively been selling passports to the super-rich under the golden passport scheme.

Some Russian criminal comes along and wants to donate lots of money to the Tories, and is rightly told, no. How does taking the same money from the same person in the same circumstances really suddenly become OK if he buys a British passport at the same time?

No I don't simply mean passport holder. He's lived in the UK for eighteen years. He became a citizen by naturalising 7 years after he moved here.

That makes him a Brit and it's racist to say anything else.

Who is he? Temerko?

UK mainstream politicians should not be accepting sizeable donations from anyone who has close links to Russias security forces, however long they have been in the UK or whatever passport they hold.

If people consider that view racist, I would rather be considered racist than pretend it is okay to be accepting these donations.

I really really doubt the same people claiming it is racist to question Tories receiving funds from ex Putin cronies, would give Corbyn the same leeway. I would be consistent on both.

Indeed I would cap donations at £1k per year per person/business/union, to make the whole issue go away.

What evidence fo you have that Temerko has close links to Russia's security forces? Other than he used to be Russian?

Whether they were born in Moscow or Manchester, anyone whom there is actual evidence or especially a conviction for such absolutely is an issue. Casting aspersions due to race is an entirely different matter.

And considering the courts said that Putin was trying to persecute Temerko back in 2005 I'm assuming the evidence from the courts is the polar opposite of your allegations. Unless you have some overwhelming new evidence?

From reuters below. According to them he himself accepts he has had formal relations with Russian security services. Claims to have fallen out with Putin and that is the most likely explanation by far but if you were FSB wanting an agent active at the top of UK politics, your cover story would indeed be a fall out.

Really no-one should be able to buy access to our political leaders in the way they do, but to allow people with historic links to a hostile superpower to do so, whether they have fallen out or not, is a massive security risk.

https://www.reuters.com/investigates/special-report/britain-eu-johnson-russian/

"Temerko said that in those days his status meant he was essentially untouchable. His security ties, he said, once got him access to a meeting of the Russian Security Council, the circle of 24 top Russian officials, chaired by Putin, who steer national security policy."

"One of Temerko’s former business partners in Russia, Leonid Nevzlin, said Temerko had long-standing ties with Russian security agencies, but declined to say whether he believes those ties remain active. Nevzlin and Temerko were shareholders in oil firm Yukos, before Putin’s government seized control of the company. Nevzlin, who was one of the main shareholders, said Yukos’s management brought Temerko in “for several projects as well as for his contacts at the top of the Federal Security Service and the Defence Ministry."

"Asked to respond, Temerko said in a follow-up interview this week that his role at Yukos encompassed the oil company’s connections with the entire Russian state, not just with the Defence Ministry. His relations with people in the security services, he added, were “formal” and not “personal.” He denied having any ongoing links with Russian security services."

Not to be a Grammar Nazi but there is a crucial difference between "has" and "had". The use of past tense or present tense there is extremely important.

Throughout history many defectors and migrants have left a country and played important roles going forwards in even classified materials. The Manhattan Project in World War Two famously even had German-born scientists working in it like Hans Bethe.

The fact that Temerko had connections with Russia doesn't mean he has them. Yes you can imply that the fall out with Putin's Russia could be a "cover story" but the simple fact is that its more than that - the evidence has been put before the courts already and the courts ruled that he was being persecuted by Putin. Furthermore I expect (but have no evidence, its simply reasonable to assume) that MI6 would put such potentially exposed people on a watchlist and be looking for evidence of any such risks.

I put faith in the security services and the rule of law where the courts have ruled that he is persecuted by Putin. Why do you object to the rule of law?

First I am considered a racist for objecting to ex Putin connections funding the Tory party and having privileged access to our leaders, now I am accused of rejecting the rule of law.

This is simply bonkers.

For a low level MoD or Security Services role we would interview people with great background depth and rule out people for things like an alcoholic mother or a brother with a gambling problem. Yet many seem quite content with billionaires who attended the Russian Security Council meetings chaired by Putin to pay for access to our PMs and Foreign Secretaries.

I question institutions because they repeatedly fail and need scrutiny. I question financial motives because it is an obvious way to control people. This is common sense, not racism or rejecting the rule of law.

Its not bonkers. The security services (presumably) and the courts (definitely) have looked into Temerko. Since decades ago, when Tony Blair was PM. The courts ruled that Termerko was being persecuted by Putin, that is a matter of case history that is public record. That is the rule of law.

Furthermore Termerko acquired British citizenship over a decade ago, seven years after he migrated here when Blair was Prime Minister. So he is British, that is a simple fact, so to call him Russian instead of British is racism that belongs in the BNP. Migrants who acquire British citizenship are Britons they are not the nationality of their birth and that is unequivocal.

Or do you seriously not accept that migrants who have had British citizenship for over a decade are Britons?

He is British. He is an ex Putin connection who many say has current connections to the Russian state. He himself says he has had past connections to the Russian state and security services but does not any more.

It is not being born Russian that should disqualify him from paid access to the PM, it is the connections to the Russian state and its security apparatus.

Past connections, not present ones, which the courts (and presumably our security services) have already ruled upon.

Should that mean he's disbarred for life, when the courts have already ruled on this matter?

Disbarred? From what, buying the influence of a PM? Yes

Living here, running a business, expressing his opinions? No

Nobody is buying influence of a PM. British citizens are entitled to donate to political parties and you've accepted that he is a British citizen.

So under what procedure should you strip his rights away, when he's a British citizen that the courts have already ruled is persecuted by Putin?

From the same Reuters article. This is paying for influence.

"Temerko spoke warmly about his “friend” Johnson, telling how the two men sometimes call each other “Sasha,” the Russian diminutive for Alexander, which is Johnson’s real first name. He described how, at the beginning of Johnson’s tenure as Foreign Secretary from 2016 to 2018, they would often “plot” late into the evening over a bottle of wine on the balcony of Johnson’s office at parliament in Westminster."

As stated my control would be a max £1k political donation per year from any individual, business or union, which would make these issues irrelevant. Until then it should be political parties and leaders exercising responsibility or facing public flak when they dont!

And that's why funding reform will never happen.

Well, one reason.

But I absolutely support very strict limits on amounts that can be given. Since doners aren't supposed to directly gain from doing so the risks of giving them such influence outweighs the 'harm' of a party not being able to receive flipping great wodges of cash from a small group of people and organisations. Spend less and ask for volunteers.

Were Charles here he'd say something about people just wanting to give bsck etc, but tough, and they'd get over the disappointment.

Donors can give back in other ways if they really want to.
Take Len Blavatnik, one of the UK's richest citizens. Has donated to both Labour and Tories, Obama, anti-Trump republicans, and Trump.
I'm sure he's a splendid guy and generous philanthropist, but what on earth is the purpose of such general gifting of money to politicians ?

Let them fund their university institutes or art galleries, but let's impose stricter limits on direct political donations.
Their money gives them quite enough influence without that.

(For the avoidance of doubt, all of the above is entirely tangential to the issue of sanctions on Putin.)

Pro_Rata

To troll the Scots, I'd bring in the dram (3.5ml) as the official optic measure for whisky. Or halve it for a wee dram.

I'll have a wee dram of Talisker
Here you go (drip)
?

JRM could go for that one.

turbotubbs

Cookie said:

CarlottaVance said:

Tres said:

This idea to reintroduce imperial measures is traffic cone hotlines levels of pathetic from the government.

Traffic Cones hotline was an important principle - giving voters access to a bureaucracy which before had been untouchable and unaccountable.

This on the other hand, as Malc would say is pure “mince”.

It’s actually a study looking for any benefits of doing it.

I’ll happily do it.

“None”

Invoice attached.

We have, at present, an uneasy balance between the units which people use and which are pleasant to say, and the units which are technically easy to calculate in. I'd say the balance is fine. I was uncomfortable with efforts to criminalise the use of imperial measures, but I see no need at all to actively go out of our way to bring imperial measures back into use where we're currently not using them.

I suspect that this is a generational thing that will gradually resolve. When the oldies who insist on pounds and ounces, and inches and fahrenheit die off, so will the desire for imperial units.

Anabobazina

As far as I can see, we already use the imperial system widely including in the most visible areas – roads and pubs.

It's been perfectly legal to sell goods in imperial for years now, as long as you also give the metric equivalent equal billing*. So what is the point of this inquiry by the government?

*P.S. as an aside, I was in Borough Market the other day and noticed several items on a fruit stall being sold in imperial only. On the same stall, some other goods were sold in metric only.

I surmised two things:

1. That these laws, as they exist, are rarely enforced, at least in that particular market

2. The fruiterer will use the measurement that best benefits his sales – i.e. sounds like the customer is getting more for less

Anabobazina

DecrepiterJohnL said:

kle4 said:

DecrepiterJohnL said:

Tres said:

This idea to reintroduce imperial measures is traffic cone hotlines levels of pathetic from the government.

Reintroduce imperial measures to what? Speed limit signs still show miles per hour, for instance, but champagne can no longer be bought in pints, as Churchill would have had.

And life has gone on nevertheless. What benefits will occur from this new old path?

No idea. The devil is in the detail. I suspect teaching schoolchildren to measure their heights in feet and inches, while using metres for physics lessons, would probably be a good idea but I've not seen any detail of what the government intends, if it intends anything at all: some policies are for announcing, not enacting.

All of my son's friends (12-14 years old) already use feet and inches for their heights. I don't think metric is widely used for that purpose, even among the young.

MoonRabbit

Cookie said:

MoonRabbit said:

ydoethur said:

@Farooq Three books, picked at random from my library on the subject;

Alexander Polunov, Russia in the Nineteenth Century P.106
'The peasants could not accept such prominent features of the [1861] reform as the preservation of gentry landholding and the redemption of their allotments...the peasants began to suspect the Tsar had been deceived...rumours arose of a scheduled hour or promised hour when the Tsar would announce real emancipation to them, without redemption payments or reduced allotments.'

P.232 Inequality and stratification would inevitably result when the peasants personally owned their allotment land and could buy and sell it...Stolypin predicted that some of the peasants who lost their lands would find work in the growing industrial cities. For others, he proposed large scale emigration to the eastern areas of the empire...[which] would remove the hapless, embittered and potentially rebellious peasants from overpopulated central Russia.'

Peter Waldron,The End of Imperial Russia P. 51

'The need for them [the peasantry] to pay for the land they farmed was wholly at odds with the fundamental belief among the peasants that, as they worked the land, they were its real owners.'

P.54 'Even where farmsteads were formed wholly separate from the village settlements, there are many examples of them being occupied only seasonally so that the peasants returned to live in the village during the winter. The attraction of the village community remained strong.'

J. N. WEstwood, Endurance and Endeavour, Russian History 1812-1992

P.79 'To the peasant, who believed the land was rightfully his, it seemed he was being compelled to buy his own property....many were in no hurry because they anticipated the land to be received would be more of a burden than an asset; it was too small to support him but entailed heavy tax and redemption payments.'

I’m not taking the pee or anything Doctor, but you can reference Anna Karenina too, it covers the subject very well.

Communists to serfs: we are going to free you.
Serfs to Communists: bugger off you deluded capitalist twits, we like our way off life, we are guaranteed work and housing.

There was a distinction between serfs and peasants, though, no? Serfdom had - surely - been abolished by the twentieth century? Serfs were basically slaves, albeit slaves who had the privileges of being able to be subject to taxes and conscription.

I've read a couple of histories of Russia, though some time ago now, so I may be misremebering. They may as well have been subtitled '1000 years of sheer unrelenting bloody misery for everyone'.

I’m happy to be corrected, but I think, probably because Russia had such a strong authoritarian and brutal state, they were more than half a century behind the nineteenth century liberal revolutions by the time Germans put Lenin (another vlad!) on the train.

DecrepiterJohnL

NickyBreakspear said:

CarlottaVance said:

Tres said:

This idea to reintroduce imperial measures is traffic cone hotlines levels of pathetic from the government.

Traffic Cones hotline was an important principle - giving voters access to a bureaucracy which before had been untouchable and unaccountable.

This on the other hand, as Malc would say is pure “mince”.

It’s actually a study looking for any benefits of doing it.

I’ll happily do it.

“None”

Invoice attached.

Can I suggest selling petrol and diesel in gallons. We still think about fuel efficiency in miles per gallon - the obvious mixed measure miles per litre does not appear to be well used.

I do not drive but my observation is that people mainly "fill her up" or use currency as their unit of measurement, adding £5 or £10's worth.

HYUFD

I can't see Le Pen failing to get the nominations needed to get on the ballot. Even if she does not that does not necessarily benefit Pecresse if Zemmour does as most Le Pen voters would go to Zemmour over Pecresse.

In the runoff Le Pen is also now doing about as well as Pecresse v Macron in the runoff, both do better than Zemmour who Macron defeats by a landslide but Macron still beats both

NickPalmer

MoonRabbit said:

*betting post! She did say though, Greens nearly won a rock solid Labour council seat, and are on course for winning everything, all council seats, the mayor and all the MPs at the election. Is it possible something bonkers that completely bucks the national trend could happen without us realising in a odd port urban enclave with two university populations?

It's exaggerated - they're doing well and potentially are transfer-friendly from LDs and some Tories, but not that well. They did, after, fail to win the seat despite deploying just that tactical argument. It's certainly their best shot after Brighton, though.

Malmesbury

MoonRabbit said:

Cookie said:

MoonRabbit said:

ydoethur said:

@Farooq Three books, picked at random from my library on the subject;

Alexander Polunov, Russia in the Nineteenth Century P.106
'The peasants could not accept such prominent features of the [1861] reform as the preservation of gentry landholding and the redemption of their allotments...the peasants began to suspect the Tsar had been deceived...rumours arose of a scheduled hour or promised hour when the Tsar would announce real emancipation to them, without redemption payments or reduced allotments.'

P.232 Inequality and stratification would inevitably result when the peasants personally owned their allotment land and could buy and sell it...Stolypin predicted that some of the peasants who lost their lands would find work in the growing industrial cities. For others, he proposed large scale emigration to the eastern areas of the empire...[which] would remove the hapless, embittered and potentially rebellious peasants from overpopulated central Russia.'

Peter Waldron,The End of Imperial Russia P. 51

'The need for them [the peasantry] to pay for the land they farmed was wholly at odds with the fundamental belief among the peasants that, as they worked the land, they were its real owners.'

P.54 'Even where farmsteads were formed wholly separate from the village settlements, there are many examples of them being occupied only seasonally so that the peasants returned to live in the village during the winter. The attraction of the village community remained strong.'

J. N. WEstwood, Endurance and Endeavour, Russian History 1812-1992

P.79 'To the peasant, who believed the land was rightfully his, it seemed he was being compelled to buy his own property....many were in no hurry because they anticipated the land to be received would be more of a burden than an asset; it was too small to support him but entailed heavy tax and redemption payments.'

I’m not taking the pee or anything Doctor, but you can reference Anna Karenina too, it covers the subject very well.

Communists to serfs: we are going to free you.
Serfs to Communists: bugger off you deluded capitalist twits, we like our way off life, we are guaranteed work and housing.

There was a distinction between serfs and peasants, though, no? Serfdom had - surely - been abolished by the twentieth century? Serfs were basically slaves, albeit slaves who had the privileges of being able to be subject to taxes and conscription.

I've read a couple of histories of Russia, though some time ago now, so I may be misremebering. They may as well have been subtitled '1000 years of sheer unrelenting bloody misery for everyone'.

I’m happy to be corrected, but I think, probably because Russia had such a strong authoritarian and brutal state, they were more than half a century behind the nineteenth century liberal revolutions by the time Germans put Lenin (another vlad!) on the train.

I would say - sort of. By the end it was more about incompetence and corruption than authoritarian brutality.

I would also say that a major cause of the revolution was the increase in education and standards of living caused by the explosive growth of the Russian economy (in patches) before WWI. When things are changing, it becomes possible to imagine things changing for the better...

Alphabet_Soup

Anabobazina said:

As far as I can see, we already use the imperial system widely including in the most visible areas – roads and pubs.

It's been perfectly legal to sell goods in imperial for years now, as long as you also give the metric equivalent equal billing*. So what is the point of this inquiry by the government?

*P.S. as an aside, I was in Borough Market the other day and noticed several items on a fruit stall being sold in imperial only. On the same stall, some other goods were sold in metric only.

I surmised two things:

1. That these laws, as they exist, are rarely enforced, at least in that particular market

2. The fruiterer will use the measurement that best benefits his sales – i.e. sounds like the customer is getting more for less

Paradoxically the USA has proudly retained imperial measures in spite of the unpleasantness in 1776 while their northern neighbours, still part of the empire, have adopted the Napoleonic system.

darkage

CarlottaVance said:

It should be noted that if RT is shut down in the UK then it's pretty much a certainty the BBC will be kicked out of Russia. Seeing barely anyone watches RT in the UK and they'd still produce their web content I'd rather keep them and still have the BBC operating inside Russia.

https://twitter.com/EliotHiggins/status/1496464538404851719

Surely though its only a matter of time until the BBC are kicked out of Russia anyway,

WhisperingOracle

Alphabet_Soup said:

Anabobazina said:

As far as I can see, we already use the imperial system widely including in the most visible areas – roads and pubs.

It's been perfectly legal to sell goods in imperial for years now, as long as you also give the metric equivalent equal billing*. So what is the point of this inquiry by the government?

*P.S. as an aside, I was in Borough Market the other day and noticed several items on a fruit stall being sold in imperial only. On the same stall, some other goods were sold in metric only.

I surmised two things:

1. That these laws, as they exist, are rarely enforced, at least in that particular market

2. The fruiterer will use the measurement that best benefits his sales – i.e. sounds like the customer is getting more for less

Paradoxically the USA has proudly retained imperial measures in spite of the unpleasantness in 1776 while their northern neighbours, still part of the empire, have adopted the Napoleonic system.

There's a parallel there with Fahrenheit, which the U.S. still uses.

IshmaelZ

Anabobazina said:

DecrepiterJohnL said:

kle4 said:

DecrepiterJohnL said:

Tres said:

This idea to reintroduce imperial measures is traffic cone hotlines levels of pathetic from the government.

Reintroduce imperial measures to what? Speed limit signs still show miles per hour, for instance, but champagne can no longer be bought in pints, as Churchill would have had.

And life has gone on nevertheless. What benefits will occur from this new old path?

No idea. The devil is in the detail. I suspect teaching schoolchildren to measure their heights in feet and inches, while using metres for physics lessons, would probably be a good idea but I've not seen any detail of what the government intends, if it intends anything at all: some policies are for announcing, not enacting.

All of my son's friends (12-14 years old) already use feet and inches for their heights. I don't think metric is widely used for that purpose, even among the young.

I read somewhere that the French police find it pointless giving the height of suspects in cm, even after 2 centuries

Foreign types tend to give horse heights in cm. This is less bad than it sounds because 10 cm is 4 in is 1 hand, approx, so if you just divide by ten you are in the right ballpark

MoonRabbit

NickPalmer said:

MoonRabbit said:

*betting post! She did say though, Greens nearly won a rock solid Labour council seat, and are on course for winning everything, all council seats, the mayor and all the MPs at the election. Is it possible something bonkers that completely bucks the national trend could happen without us realising in a odd port urban enclave with two university populations?

It's exaggerated - they're doing well and potentially are transfer-friendly from LDs and some Tories, but not that well. They did, after, fail to win the seat despite deploying just that tactical argument. It's certainly their best shot after Brighton, though.

I’m not saying you are wrong. But harking back to failure to take seats at last election might be wrong, because it’s since then the greens can’t stop surging in the city. The bit we might be missing, “ potentially are transfer-friendly from LDs and some Tories” suggests not from Labour? But they can get what you said and Labour votes in droves too. If you have a local Labour Party not liking it’s MP, but failing to dump them, voting green dumps them is another factor?

Flatlander

DecrepiterJohnL said:

NickyBreakspear said:

CarlottaVance said:

Tres said:

This idea to reintroduce imperial measures is traffic cone hotlines levels of pathetic from the government.

Traffic Cones hotline was an important principle - giving voters access to a bureaucracy which before had been untouchable and unaccountable.

This on the other hand, as Malc would say is pure “mince”.

It’s actually a study looking for any benefits of doing it.

I’ll happily do it.

“None”

Invoice attached.

Can I suggest selling petrol and diesel in gallons. We still think about fuel efficiency in miles per gallon - the obvious mixed measure miles per litre does not appear to be well used.

I do not drive but my observation is that people mainly "fill her up" or use currency as their unit of measurement, adding £5 or £10's worth.

I think it would be a shock for some to find out quite how expensive a gallon is these days!

Of course, we never went all in on metric. We still use Babylonian measures for time. Decimal hours anyone?

NorthofStoke

DecrepiterJohnL said:

NickyBreakspear said:

CarlottaVance said:

Tres said:

This idea to reintroduce imperial measures is traffic cone hotlines levels of pathetic from the government.

Traffic Cones hotline was an important principle - giving voters access to a bureaucracy which before had been untouchable and unaccountable.

This on the other hand, as Malc would say is pure “mince”.

It’s actually a study looking for any benefits of doing it.

I’ll happily do it.

“None”

Invoice attached.

Can I suggest selling petrol and diesel in gallons. We still think about fuel efficiency in miles per gallon - the obvious mixed measure miles per litre does not appear to be well used.

I do not drive but my observation is that people mainly "fill her up" or use currency as their unit of measurement, adding £5 or £10's worth.

Shortly that will be £150's worth.

Pro_Rata

Farooq said:

Pro_Rata said:

To troll the Scots, I'd bring in the dram (3.5ml) as the official optic measure for whisky. Or halve it for a wee dram.

I'll have a wee dram of Talisker
Here you go (drip)
?

JRM could go for that one.

Firstly, you mean 35ml, not 3.5ml

Secondly, at least in my experience, if you ask for a dram you get 50ml. A nip is 25ml.

That 3.5 ml is unspeakably tiny was rather the point.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dram_(unit)?wprov=sfla1

Leon

Malmesbury said:

Burgessian said:

This is quite something. Vladimir Putin's public humiliation of his spy chief at the recent conclave. I hadn't realised quite how contemptuous he is of his apparatchiks. Subtitles provided. Really worth watching.

https://twitter.com/peterliakhov/status/1495851796782362628

The whole thing is reaching SPECTRE levels of WTF....

Also reminiscent of Saddam Hussein in the notorious real-life video where he denounces a terrified traitor in the meeting, who is then dragged off to a grisly fate, AND it reminds me of a movie scene (can’t recall the name) where Al Capone gets a rival publicly whacked - again during a meeting

Suggests Putin has reached gangster/tyrant levels of paranoid omnipotence. The stronger you are, the more afraid you become. Someone will steal The Precious!!

Putin’s downfall might not be far away

🙏

Applicant

Cookie said:

CarlottaVance said:

Tres said:

This idea to reintroduce imperial measures is traffic cone hotlines levels of pathetic from the government.

Traffic Cones hotline was an important principle - giving voters access to a bureaucracy which before had been untouchable and unaccountable.

This on the other hand, as Malc would say is pure “mince”.

It’s actually a study looking for any benefits of doing it.

I’ll happily do it.

“None”

Invoice attached.

We have, at present, an uneasy balance between the units which people use and which are pleasant to say, and the units which are technically easy to calculate in. I'd say the balance is fine. I was uncomfortable with efforts to criminalise the use of imperial measures, but I see no need at all to actively go out of our way to bring imperial measures back into use where we're currently not using them.

If what is proposed it to make it legal for someone to order a pound of apples and it to be weighed as a poiund and labelled as a pound with no mention of 454g, then that is fine. It will have minimal effect, but repealing bad laws is a good thing.

But given that pretty much everything is metric anyway, going any further than that would be counterproductive.

glw

WhisperingOracle said:

Burgessian said:

This is quite something. Vladimir Putin's public humiliation of his spy chief at the recent conclave. I hadn't realised quite how contemptuous he is of his apparatchiks. Subtitles provided. Really worth watching.

https://twitter.com/peterliakhov/status/1495851796782362628

I was fascinated by this too. It reminds me very much of the public humiliations of Stalin's show-trials, in tone.

It also very obviously shows that Putin feels he has to reinforce his position through some level of fear, both to the public at large and internally, at the moment. There must be internal issues, probably several.

There must be some people in the Kremlin who think Putin's New Russian Empire plan is barmy. Hell there might even be a few who think that the governance of Russia would be a lot better and easier if they weren't in cahoots with organised crime.

IshmaelZ

Alphabet_Soup said:

Anabobazina said:

As far as I can see, we already use the imperial system widely including in the most visible areas – roads and pubs.

It's been perfectly legal to sell goods in imperial for years now, as long as you also give the metric equivalent equal billing*. So what is the point of this inquiry by the government?

*P.S. as an aside, I was in Borough Market the other day and noticed several items on a fruit stall being sold in imperial only. On the same stall, some other goods were sold in metric only.

I surmised two things:

1. That these laws, as they exist, are rarely enforced, at least in that particular market

2. The fruiterer will use the measurement that best benefits his sales – i.e. sounds like the customer is getting more for less

Paradoxically the USA has proudly retained imperial measures in spite of the unpleasantness in 1776 while their northern neighbours, still part of the empire, have adopted the Napoleonic system.

Yes and no, they are non metric but by and large aren't Imperial either. Gallons and pints are different from ours

junius

Since the pandemic broke out - my car has been doing 6 months to the gallon.

Anabobazina

NickyBreakspear said:

CarlottaVance said:

Tres said:

This idea to reintroduce imperial measures is traffic cone hotlines levels of pathetic from the government.

Traffic Cones hotline was an important principle - giving voters access to a bureaucracy which before had been untouchable and unaccountable.

This on the other hand, as Malc would say is pure “mince”.

It’s actually a study looking for any benefits of doing it.

I’ll happily do it.

“None”

Invoice attached.

Can I suggest selling petrol and diesel in gallons. We still think about fuel efficiency in miles per gallon - the obvious mixed measure miles per litre does not appear to be well used.

Fair point. I have never grasped why we use mpg for fuel efficiency, yet petrol is advertised in price per litre. Seems completely bonkers even by British standards. I'm quite suspicious of Big Oil so always assumed it was to trick the customer into thinking the fuel was cheaper than it was –– but that's almost certainly a conspiracy theory too far.

Applicant

DecrepiterJohnL said:

NickyBreakspear said:

CarlottaVance said:

Tres said:

This idea to reintroduce imperial measures is traffic cone hotlines levels of pathetic from the government.

Traffic Cones hotline was an important principle - giving voters access to a bureaucracy which before had been untouchable and unaccountable.

This on the other hand, as Malc would say is pure “mince”.

It’s actually a study looking for any benefits of doing it.

I’ll happily do it.

“None”

Invoice attached.

Can I suggest selling petrol and diesel in gallons. We still think about fuel efficiency in miles per gallon - the obvious mixed measure miles per litre does not appear to be well used.

I do not drive but my observation is that people mainly "fill her up" or use currency as their unit of measurement, adding £5 or £10's worth.

This is true. Except the £5 worth - that won't get you very far these days

philiph

Anabobazina said:

DecrepiterJohnL said:

kle4 said:

DecrepiterJohnL said:

Tres said:

This idea to reintroduce imperial measures is traffic cone hotlines levels of pathetic from the government.

Reintroduce imperial measures to what? Speed limit signs still show miles per hour, for instance, but champagne can no longer be bought in pints, as Churchill would have had.

And life has gone on nevertheless. What benefits will occur from this new old path?

No idea. The devil is in the detail. I suspect teaching schoolchildren to measure their heights in feet and inches, while using metres for physics lessons, would probably be a good idea but I've not seen any detail of what the government intends, if it intends anything at all: some policies are for announcing, not enacting.

All of my son's friends (12-14 years old) already use feet and inches for their heights. I don't think metric is widely used for that purpose, even among the young.

There is something about the landmark of 6 ft. To get to 2 m is not so desirable

WhisperingOracle

This article, and the associated videos, make Wallace's remarks look more like semi-official chat and less like private banter, and are also getting a lot of coverage in the Mail, which means they will be read in Russia.

Crazy.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10542729/Ben-Wallace-claims-Putin-gone-tonto-Ukraine-crisis.html

Malmesbury

Leon said:

Malmesbury said:

Burgessian said:

This is quite something. Vladimir Putin's public humiliation of his spy chief at the recent conclave. I hadn't realised quite how contemptuous he is of his apparatchiks. Subtitles provided. Really worth watching.

https://twitter.com/peterliakhov/status/1495851796782362628

The whole thing is reaching SPECTRE levels of WTF....

Also reminiscent of Saddam Hussein in the notorious real-life video where he denounces a terrified traitor in the meeting, who is then dragged off to a grisly fate, AND it reminds me of a movie scene (can’t recall the name) where Al Capone gets a rival publicly whacked - again during a meeting

Suggests Putin has reached gangster/tyrant levels of paranoid omnipotence. The stronger you are, the more afraid you become. Someone will steal The Precious!!

Putin’s downfall might not be far away

🙏

The Al Capone scene you are thinking of is in the Untouchables (the one with Kevin Costner).

I posted a link to the Saddam scene the other day.

dixiedean

MoonRabbit said:

On topic. I don’t have a bet here. But I like to think a good nose for outside bets. Here it is sniffing for a good deal

.

Firstly as header shows it’s crowded thistime on the right in first round, so whoever comes second might not have a high %. Secondly I know Socialist parties used to win elections, and are now 1% in polls. So where has it gone. Mostly I suspect to Macron and Melenchon.
So for Melrnchon not to sneak into surprise second it needs those lefty’s to stick with Macron in the first round. And maybe they won’t? Macron is sure to progress, but Melechron can be surprise second.

That’s what my nose suggests.

Would laugh myself daft were the right with over 50% of the vote to split itself perfectly three ways.
And end up with Melenchon or Macron as a choice.

Nigelb

philiph said:

Anabobazina said:

DecrepiterJohnL said:

kle4 said:

DecrepiterJohnL said:

Tres said:

This idea to reintroduce imperial measures is traffic cone hotlines levels of pathetic from the government.

Reintroduce imperial measures to what? Speed limit signs still show miles per hour, for instance, but champagne can no longer be bought in pints, as Churchill would have had.

And life has gone on nevertheless. What benefits will occur from this new old path?

No idea. The devil is in the detail. I suspect teaching schoolchildren to measure their heights in feet and inches, while using metres for physics lessons, would probably be a good idea but I've not seen any detail of what the government intends, if it intends anything at all: some policies are for announcing, not enacting.

All of my son's friends (12-14 years old) already use feet and inches for their heights. I don't think metric is widely used for that purpose, even among the young.

There is something about the landmark of 6 ft. To get to 2 m is not so desirable

An argument I can't fathom...

ydoethur

Malmesbury said:

TimS said:

Malmesbury said:

Burgessian said:

This is quite something. Vladimir Putin's public humiliation of his spy chief at the recent conclave. I hadn't realised quite how contemptuous he is of his apparatchiks. Subtitles provided. Really worth watching.

https://twitter.com/peterliakhov/status/1495851796782362628

The whole thing is reaching SPECTRE levels of WTF....

He really is a Bond Villain isn't he? Even the name: Vladimir Putin.

"Well hello, Mr Macron. I've been expecting you".

Well, he gets his ideas on tables for meetings from that nice Mr Stromberg...



"Mmm, maybe I misjudged Stromberg. Any man who drinks Dom Perignon '52 can't be all bad."

It was a good Bach.

MoonRabbit

BartholomewRoberts said:

That so many left-wing Britons are more interested in Putin's enemies that our courts have been sheltering from Putin's persecution, than Putin's allies, speaks volumes about their priorities.

I think I understand what you are saying. No money should be given back because it’s legitimate if someone has a UK passport.

So you agree with me then, Boris latest dog whistle wheeze at PMQs is a spectacular own goal, when he mentioned a Labour MP accepted £100’sK from a Chinese Spy the heckling of Starmer began. It pulled the rug from under Starmer’s line, and the Tory back benches rallied to Boris and heckled.

Boris should never have said that. The more I think about it that is probably the most stupid thing Boris has ever done. 😦

Applicant

philiph said:

Anabobazina said:

DecrepiterJohnL said:

kle4 said:

DecrepiterJohnL said:

Tres said:

This idea to reintroduce imperial measures is traffic cone hotlines levels of pathetic from the government.

Reintroduce imperial measures to what? Speed limit signs still show miles per hour, for instance, but champagne can no longer be bought in pints, as Churchill would have had.

And life has gone on nevertheless. What benefits will occur from this new old path?

No idea. The devil is in the detail. I suspect teaching schoolchildren to measure their heights in feet and inches, while using metres for physics lessons, would probably be a good idea but I've not seen any detail of what the government intends, if it intends anything at all: some policies are for announcing, not enacting.

All of my son's friends (12-14 years old) already use feet and inches for their heights. I don't think metric is widely used for that purpose, even among the young.

There is something about the landmark of 6 ft. To get to 2 m is not so desirable

Feet are just more human-sized. 5 ft is small, 6 ft is a tallish man, 7 ft is a basketball player. Whereas 1 m is a child, 2 m is very tall and 3 m is impossible.

IshmaelZ

WhisperingOracle said:

This article, and the associated videos, make Wallace's remarks look more like semi-official chat than private banter, and are also getting a lot of coverage in the Mail, which means they will be read in Russia.

Crazy.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10542729/Ben-Wallace-claims-Putin-gone-tonto-Ukraine-crisis.html

I detect Trussery: profile raising with a view to having a stab at the top job.

Makes him look an arse but doesn't really matter, I don't think being called tonto by a flesh lump in a waistcoat will be what tips Vlad into total war

Anabobazina

Cookie said:

CarlottaVance said:

Tres said:

This idea to reintroduce imperial measures is traffic cone hotlines levels of pathetic from the government.

Traffic Cones hotline was an important principle - giving voters access to a bureaucracy which before had been untouchable and unaccountable.

This on the other hand, as Malc would say is pure “mince”.

It’s actually a study looking for any benefits of doing it.

I’ll happily do it.

“None”

Invoice attached.

We have, at present, an uneasy balance between the units which people use and which are pleasant to say, and the units which are technically easy to calculate in. I'd say the balance is fine. I was uncomfortable with efforts to criminalise the use of imperial measures, but I see no need at all to actively go out of our way to bring imperial measures back into use where we're currently not using them.

We perhaps missed a trick by not simply metricating imperial units?

A yard could have been 1,000mm

A foot, 300mm

A pound 500g

An inch 25mm

And so on?

WhisperingOracle

IshmaelZ said:

WhisperingOracle said:

This article, and the associated videos, make Wallace's remarks look more like semi-official chat than private banter, and are also getting a lot of coverage in the Mail, which means they will be read in Russia.

Crazy.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10542729/Ben-Wallace-claims-Putin-gone-tonto-Ukraine-crisis.html

I detect Trussery: profile raising with a view to having a stab at the top job.

Makes him look an arse but doesn't really matter, I don't think being called tonto by a flesh lump in a waistcoat will be what tips Vlad into total war

Indeed no, but it's certainly stupid and doesn't help things.

If he really thinks that's an appropriate way of leadership-raising he's an idiot, which he hasn't shown up untll now.

Flatlander

Anabobazina said:

NickyBreakspear said:

CarlottaVance said:

Tres said:

This idea to reintroduce imperial measures is traffic cone hotlines levels of pathetic from the government.

Traffic Cones hotline was an important principle - giving voters access to a bureaucracy which before had been untouchable and unaccountable.

This on the other hand, as Malc would say is pure “mince”.

It’s actually a study looking for any benefits of doing it.

I’ll happily do it.

“None”

Invoice attached.

Can I suggest selling petrol and diesel in gallons. We still think about fuel efficiency in miles per gallon - the obvious mixed measure miles per litre does not appear to be well used.

Fair point. I have never grasped why we use mpg for fuel efficiency, yet petrol is advertised in price per litre. Seems completely bonkers even by British standards. I'm quite suspicious of Big Oil so always assumed it was to trick the customer into thinking the fuel was cheaper than it was –– but that's almost certainly a conspiracy theory too far.

Labelling the price per gallon might improve the competition a bit. I know it is irrational, but if the difference is 4.5p per gallon instead of 1p per litre, people might actually notice more.

Though I expect it would be used as an excuse to hide a 10% price hike in the conversion.

LostPassword

tlg86 said:

First. There is something seriously wrong with democracy in France if a candidate on c.15% and second place in the polls can't make the starting line.

Surely a deposit system would make more sense. Say, 1m Euros and then you get back 100k for every 0.5% of the vote you get up to 5% when you get it all back.

This is analogous to the situation with the 2015 Labour leadership election. The system is designed so that the Mayor's exercise a nominating function for the purpose of ensuring that any candidate has that breadth of support from people who themselves have been elected.

The whole point is that if the Mayors collectively don't think a candidate is suitable to be nominated then they can prevent that, regardless of public support.

If public support is sustained then, of course, the candidate would see supportive Mayors elected anyway, but having a nomination threshold is not unusual and serves a purpose separate to raw levels of popular support.

dixiedean

philiph said:

Anabobazina said:

DecrepiterJohnL said:

kle4 said:

DecrepiterJohnL said:

Tres said:

This idea to reintroduce imperial measures is traffic cone hotlines levels of pathetic from the government.

Reintroduce imperial measures to what? Speed limit signs still show miles per hour, for instance, but champagne can no longer be bought in pints, as Churchill would have had.

And life has gone on nevertheless. What benefits will occur from this new old path?

No idea. The devil is in the detail. I suspect teaching schoolchildren to measure their heights in feet and inches, while using metres for physics lessons, would probably be a good idea but I've not seen any detail of what the government intends, if it intends anything at all: some policies are for announcing, not enacting.

All of my son's friends (12-14 years old) already use feet and inches for their heights. I don't think metric is widely used for that purpose, even among the young.

There is something about the landmark of 6 ft. To get to 2 m is not so desirable

Unless you want the NBA of course.

HYUFD

dixiedean said:

MoonRabbit said:

On topic. I don’t have a bet here. But I like to think a good nose for outside bets. Here it is sniffing for a good deal

.

Firstly as header shows it’s crowded thistime on the right in first round, so whoever comes second might not have a high %. Secondly I know Socialist parties used to win elections, and are now 1% in polls. So where has it gone. Mostly I suspect to Macron and Melenchon.
So for Melrnchon not to sneak into surprise second it needs those lefty’s to stick with Macron in the first round. And maybe they won’t? Macron is sure to progress, but Melechron can be surprise second.

That’s what my nose suggests.

Would laugh myself daft were the right with over 50% of the vote to split itself perfectly three ways.
And end up with Melenchon or Macron as a choice.

It won't. Melenchon is on about 10% as the left is even more split than the right between him, the Socialist and Green candidates and the Independent Leftist candidate Taubira

Malmesbury

ydoethur said:

Malmesbury said:

TimS said:

Malmesbury said:

Burgessian said:

This is quite something. Vladimir Putin's public humiliation of his spy chief at the recent conclave. I hadn't realised quite how contemptuous he is of his apparatchiks. Subtitles provided. Really worth watching.

https://twitter.com/peterliakhov/status/1495851796782362628

The whole thing is reaching SPECTRE levels of WTF....

He really is a Bond Villain isn't he? Even the name: Vladimir Putin.

"Well hello, Mr Macron. I've been expecting you".

Well, he gets his ideas on tables for meetings from that nice Mr Stromberg...



"Mmm, maybe I misjudged Stromberg. Any man who drinks Dom Perignon '52 can't be all bad."

It was a good Bach.

But it all ended up floating away...

Cookie

Applicant said:

philiph said:

Anabobazina said:

DecrepiterJohnL said:

kle4 said:

DecrepiterJohnL said:

Tres said:

This idea to reintroduce imperial measures is traffic cone hotlines levels of pathetic from the government.

Reintroduce imperial measures to what? Speed limit signs still show miles per hour, for instance, but champagne can no longer be bought in pints, as Churchill would have had.

And life has gone on nevertheless. What benefits will occur from this new old path?

No idea. The devil is in the detail. I suspect teaching schoolchildren to measure their heights in feet and inches, while using metres for physics lessons, would probably be a good idea but I've not seen any detail of what the government intends, if it intends anything at all: some policies are for announcing, not enacting.

All of my son's friends (12-14 years old) already use feet and inches for their heights. I don't think metric is widely used for that purpose, even among the young.

There is something about the landmark of 6 ft. To get to 2 m is not so desirable

Feet are just more human-sized. 5 ft is small, 6 ft is a tallish man, 7 ft is a basketball player. Whereas 1 m is a child, 2 m is very tall and 3 m is impossible.

Yes, though middle-aged-fogey though I am, feet is the metric unit I am least comfortable with. I can visualise a person being 4', 5', 6', 7' tall - but ask me to visualise a 30' building and I have to mentally translate it to metres. And I can't visualise distance (rather than height) in feet at all. Again, I have to translate into metres (or yards, which is almost the same thing, for mental-picture purposes).
That's just me though - I'm not trying to say one is better than another.

TimT

Morris_Dancer said:

We should return to proper money.

Farthings, ha'pennies, pennies, bits, groats, shillings, crowns, marks, pounds, and guineas. Huzzah!

Where's the thruppence, sixpence, florin, and half crown in that list?

As a kid, I found the thruppence was the most satisfying of coins.

tlg86

LostPassword said:

tlg86 said:

First. There is something seriously wrong with democracy in France if a candidate on c.15% and second place in the polls can't make the starting line.

Surely a deposit system would make more sense. Say, 1m Euros and then you get back 100k for every 0.5% of the vote you get up to 5% when you get it all back.

This is analogous to the situation with the 2015 Labour leadership election. The system is designed so that the Mayor's exercise a nominating function for the purpose of ensuring that any candidate has that breadth of support from people who themselves have been elected.

The whole point is that if the Mayors collectively don't think a candidate is suitable to be nominated then they can prevent that, regardless of public support.

If public support is sustained then, of course, the candidate would see supportive Mayors elected anyway, but having a nomination threshold is not unusual and serves a purpose separate to raw levels of popular support.

I'd say the two things are very different. Giving the MPs - the people who have to work with the elected leader - a say is fair enough.

People vote differently at different levels of government. I don't think people should have to think about the presidential election when they're electing a mayor.

dixiedean

Anders Celsius died aged just 42.
His rival Fahrenheit insisted he was over 107.

darkage

"Bristol couple with kids lived apart from each other for years to save up for a house"

https://www.bristolpost.co.uk/news/property/bristol-couple-kids-lived-apart-6603171

Help to buy was presented as the solution, but how can this be anything other than a damning indictment of housing policy?

Applicant

Cookie said:

Applicant said:

philiph said:

Anabobazina said:

DecrepiterJohnL said:

kle4 said:

DecrepiterJohnL said:

Tres said:

This idea to reintroduce imperial measures is traffic cone hotlines levels of pathetic from the government.

Reintroduce imperial measures to what? Speed limit signs still show miles per hour, for instance, but champagne can no longer be bought in pints, as Churchill would have had.

And life has gone on nevertheless. What benefits will occur from this new old path?

No idea. The devil is in the detail. I suspect teaching schoolchildren to measure their heights in feet and inches, while using metres for physics lessons, would probably be a good idea but I've not seen any detail of what the government intends, if it intends anything at all: some policies are for announcing, not enacting.

All of my son's friends (12-14 years old) already use feet and inches for their heights. I don't think metric is widely used for that purpose, even among the young.

There is something about the landmark of 6 ft. To get to 2 m is not so desirable

Feet are just more human-sized. 5 ft is small, 6 ft is a tallish man, 7 ft is a basketball player. Whereas 1 m is a child, 2 m is very tall and 3 m is impossible.

Yes, though middle-aged-fogey though I am, feet is the metric unit I am least comfortable with. I can visualise a person being 4', 5', 6', 7' tall - but ask me to visualise a 30' building and I have to mentally translate it to metres. And I can't visualise distance (rather than height) in feet at all. Again, I have to translate into metres (or yards, which is almost the same thing, for mental-picture purposes).
That's just me though - I'm not trying to say one is better than another.

I agree with distance - except that when you get to travel distance, miles over km every time (not least because on long journeys you can hope to average 60mph which makes approximating time from distance trivial).

Applicant

TimT said:

Morris_Dancer said:

We should return to proper money.

Farthings, ha'pennies, pennies, bits, groats, shillings, crowns, marks, pounds, and guineas. Huzzah!

Where's the thruppence, sixpence, florin, and half crown in that list?

As a kid, I found the thruppence was the most satisfying of coins.

Of course. You can get a celebratory slap-up binge at Mrs Miggins' pie shop for that.

LostPassword

NickyBreakspear said:

CarlottaVance said:

Tres said:

This idea to reintroduce imperial measures is traffic cone hotlines levels of pathetic from the government.

Traffic Cones hotline was an important principle - giving voters access to a bureaucracy which before had been untouchable and unaccountable.

This on the other hand, as Malc would say is pure “mince”.

It’s actually a study looking for any benefits of doing it.

I’ll happily do it.

“None”

Invoice attached.

Can I suggest selling petrol and diesel in gallons. We still think about fuel efficiency in miles per gallon - the obvious mixed measure miles per litre does not appear to be well used.

We should really take the opportunity to reverse the measure to be volume per distance, such as litres per 100 miles, as it makes it easier to calculate the cost of journeys and compare efficiencies.

Malmesbury

darkage said:

"Bristol couple with kids lived apart from each other for years to save up for a house"

https://www.bristolpost.co.uk/news/property/bristol-couple-kids-lived-apart-6603171

Help to buy was presented as the solution, but how can this be anything other than a damning indictment of housing policy?

Well, you have the following religious beliefs

- Development is bad
- Building things is bad
- Building houses is really really bad
- We need a rising population

Then people are surprised that there is a bit of a shortage of places for people to live....

TimT

Leon said:

Malmesbury said:

Burgessian said:

This is quite something. Vladimir Putin's public humiliation of his spy chief at the recent conclave. I hadn't realised quite how contemptuous he is of his apparatchiks. Subtitles provided. Really worth watching.

https://twitter.com/peterliakhov/status/1495851796782362628

The whole thing is reaching SPECTRE levels of WTF....

Also reminiscent of Saddam Hussein in the notorious real-life video where he denounces a terrified traitor in the meeting, who is then dragged off to a grisly fate, AND it reminds me of a movie scene (can’t recall the name) where Al Capone gets a rival publicly whacked - again during a meeting

Suggests Putin has reached gangster/tyrant levels of paranoid omnipotence. The stronger you are, the more afraid you become. Someone will steal The Precious!!

Putin’s downfall might not be far away

🙏

But that meeting was not just one 'traitor', but scores of them.

If anyone wants to remind themselves of how bad dictatorships can get, I highly recommend a (re-)read of Republic of Fear by Kanan Makiya (originally written under the pseudonym Samir al-Khalil)

Gallowgate

I see we are at that point in the PB cycle where @HYUFD is adamant that Le Pen is about to be elected president of France.

C’est la vie

Nigel_Foremain

dixiedean said:

Anders Celsius died aged just 42.
His rival Fahrenheit insisted he was over 107.

Some British people are still insisting on referring to him as Anders Centigrade

TimS

Flatlander said:

Anabobazina said:

NickyBreakspear said:

CarlottaVance said:

Tres said:

This idea to reintroduce imperial measures is traffic cone hotlines levels of pathetic from the government.

Traffic Cones hotline was an important principle - giving voters access to a bureaucracy which before had been untouchable and unaccountable.

This on the other hand, as Malc would say is pure “mince”.

It’s actually a study looking for any benefits of doing it.

I’ll happily do it.

“None”

Invoice attached.

Can I suggest selling petrol and diesel in gallons. We still think about fuel efficiency in miles per gallon - the obvious mixed measure miles per litre does not appear to be well used.

Fair point. I have never grasped why we use mpg for fuel efficiency, yet petrol is advertised in price per litre. Seems completely bonkers even by British standards. I'm quite suspicious of Big Oil so always assumed it was to trick the customer into thinking the fuel was cheaper than it was –– but that's almost certainly a conspiracy theory too far.

Labelling the price per gallon might improve the competition a bit. I know it is irrational, but if the difference is 4.5p per gallon instead of 1p per litre, people might actually notice more.

Though I expect it would be used as an excuse to hide a 10% price hike in the conversion.

We'll all be driving EVs soon anyway so it's not going to be much of a long term effect. I wonder if they could think up an imperial version of KWh.

HYUFD

Gallowgate said:

I see we are at that point in the PB cycle where @HYUFD is adamant that Le Pen is about to be elected president of France.

C’est la vie

No. I said Macron would still be re elected against Le Pen this year but she would get a 9% swing to her since 2017 on the latest poll if she made the runoff from Macron.

If she got a 9% swing again in 2027 then Le Pen would be elected President of France

northern_monkey

Just heard about the study at bringing back Imperial measurements, went to Twitter to see what the hive mind thinks. This made me chuckle:



They won’t bring them back. It’s insanity. It’s just another plank in the culture war, another way to try to secure the votes of the reactionary elderly as they continue to refuse to admit what a fucking terrible impact Brexit is having.

The Boomers in my family are beginning to look haunted as they contemplate the rapidly increasing prices for everything, half-heartedly muttering that it’s all down to Covid. I don’t think they even persuade themselves anymore. They know it’s hugely exacerbated by leaving the single market, they know collectively we’ve dropped a massive bollock whose effects fate has decided to spice up with Covid and now the turmoil in the east, they just can’t bring themselves to say it out loud yet.

IshmaelZ

WhisperingOracle said:

IshmaelZ said:

WhisperingOracle said:

This article, and the associated videos, make Wallace's remarks look more like semi-official chat than private banter, and are also getting a lot of coverage in the Mail, which means they will be read in Russia.

Crazy.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10542729/Ben-Wallace-claims-Putin-gone-tonto-Ukraine-crisis.html

I detect Trussery: profile raising with a view to having a stab at the top job.

Makes him look an arse but doesn't really matter, I don't think being called tonto by a flesh lump in a waistcoat will be what tips Vlad into total war

Indeed no, but it's certainly stupid and doesn't help things.

If he really thinks that's an appropriate way of leadership-raising he's an idiot, which he hasn't shown up untll now.

Well, you need the vote of the electorate which gave us IDS. A non idiotic approach isn't going to cut through.

No coincidence it is the Mail reporting this

tlg86

Gallowgate said:

I see we are at that point in the PB cycle where @HYUFD is adamant that Le Pen is about to be elected president of France.

C’est la vie

I think that's unfair. I think we're at the point where HYUFD is telling us what the polls are saying and others think that they'll be wrong in a certain direction.

Nigel_Foremain

Leon said:

Malmesbury said:

Burgessian said:

This is quite something. Vladimir Putin's public humiliation of his spy chief at the recent conclave. I hadn't realised quite how contemptuous he is of his apparatchiks. Subtitles provided. Really worth watching.

https://twitter.com/peterliakhov/status/1495851796782362628

The whole thing is reaching SPECTRE levels of WTF....

Also reminiscent of Saddam Hussein in the notorious real-life video where he denounces a terrified traitor in the meeting, who is then dragged off to a grisly fate, AND it reminds me of a movie scene (can’t recall the name) where Al Capone gets a rival publicly whacked - again during a meeting

Suggests Putin has reached gangster/tyrant levels of paranoid omnipotence. The stronger you are, the more afraid you become. Someone will steal The Precious!!

Putin’s downfall might not be far away

🙏

I hope you are right. The film was the Untouchables. Sadly I am not sure the global community will be able to get rid of Putin based on his tax return though.

TimT

Applicant said:

Cookie said:

Applicant said:

philiph said:

Anabobazina said:

DecrepiterJohnL said:

kle4 said:

DecrepiterJohnL said:

Tres said:

This idea to reintroduce imperial measures is traffic cone hotlines levels of pathetic from the government.

Reintroduce imperial measures to what? Speed limit signs still show miles per hour, for instance, but champagne can no longer be bought in pints, as Churchill would have had.

And life has gone on nevertheless. What benefits will occur from this new old path?

No idea. The devil is in the detail. I suspect teaching schoolchildren to measure their heights in feet and inches, while using metres for physics lessons, would probably be a good idea but I've not seen any detail of what the government intends, if it intends anything at all: some policies are for announcing, not enacting.

All of my son's friends (12-14 years old) already use feet and inches for their heights. I don't think metric is widely used for that purpose, even among the young.

There is something about the landmark of 6 ft. To get to 2 m is not so desirable

Feet are just more human-sized. 5 ft is small, 6 ft is a tallish man, 7 ft is a basketball player. Whereas 1 m is a child, 2 m is very tall and 3 m is impossible.

Yes, though middle-aged-fogey though I am, feet is the metric unit I am least comfortable with. I can visualise a person being 4', 5', 6', 7' tall - but ask me to visualise a 30' building and I have to mentally translate it to metres. And I can't visualise distance (rather than height) in feet at all. Again, I have to translate into metres (or yards, which is almost the same thing, for mental-picture purposes).
That's just me though - I'm not trying to say one is better than another.

I agree with distance - except that when you get to travel distance, miles over km every time (not least because on long journeys you can hope to average 60mph which makes approximating time from distance trivial).

For me it is temperatures. Brought up in Cyprus under imperial, I intuitively 'know' temperatures in Fahrenheit from 45F-90F. Moving to Yemen in my first overseas professional job, I intuitively 'know' temperatures in Centigrade in the 35-50C range. Then Geneva, so centigrade for 5c to -5c. And then Maryland, so back to Fahrenheit fo 20F to -25F.

kle4

Malmesbury said:

darkage said:

"Bristol couple with kids lived apart from each other for years to save up for a house"

https://www.bristolpost.co.uk/news/property/bristol-couple-kids-lived-apart-6603171

Help to buy was presented as the solution, but how can this be anything other than a damning indictment of housing policy?

Well, you have the following religious beliefs

- Development is bad
- Building things is bad
- Building houses is really really bad
- We need a rising population

Then people are surprised that there is a bit of a shortage of places for people to live....

In fairness various governments don't think development or building is bad, but since their voters generally do think that their efforts to resolve things have not been super effective.

Malmesbury

Nigel_Foremain said:

dixiedean said:

Anders Celsius died aged just 42.
His rival Fahrenheit insisted he was over 107.

Some British people are still insisting on referring to him as Anders Centigrade

I think we should get Lord Kelvin to arbitrate on that...